Archive has 60 results
-
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (22 012 539)
Statement Upheld Other 30-Mar-2023
Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly continued with bailiff action after he paid off his business rates debt. Further he says it sent notice of the debt to the business address but did not contact him directly. The bailiffs are at fault for incorrectly calculating their fees. The Council has taken action to prevent recurrence.
-
City of York Council (22 005 318)
Statement Upheld Other 28-Mar-2023
Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council took recovery action for unpaid business rates, including using enforcement agents. There was fault in how the Council failed to update Mrs X about its decision in February 2020 but this did not cause an injustice to Mrs X.
-
Westminster City Council (22 016 352)
Statement Upheld Other 21-Mar-2023
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a late Business rates bill because the matter has been remedied.
-
North West Leicestershire District Council (22 010 874)
Statement Upheld Other 10-Mar-2023
Summary: Mr X complained that the Council wrongly held his company liable for a business rates debt and failed to send invoices, denying him the opportunity to dispute the debt. He says the Council wrongly instructed enforcement agents to recover the debt and the agent who visited the premises acted in an aggressive manner. We found the Council wrongly held Mr X’s company liable for the debt but we did not uphold his other complaints. The Council has already provided an adequate remedy for the injustice caused to Mr X. It has now agreed to send an apology to his employee for the distress caused by the enforcement agent’s visit.
-
Burnley Borough Council (22 010 977)
Statement Upheld Other 08-Mar-2023
Summary: The Council acted with fault when it refused to consider Ms X’s request for relief from a Council Tax debt accrued by her abusive ex-partner. The Council was also at fault for failing to make reasonable adjustments for Ms X’s disability. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a decision on Ms X’s request, make payments to her, and act to improve its services.
-
London Borough of Barnet (22 010 267)
Statement Not upheld Other 07-Mar-2023
Summary: Mr D complains the Council did award him 100% Small Business Rates Relief in 2022. We have not found any evidence of fault by the Council and have completed the investigation and not upheld the complaint.
-
Peterborough City Council (22 007 529)
Statement Not upheld Other 28-Feb-2023
Summary: There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s invoicing for business rates in 2021-2022. Other complaints about business rates from 2011-2019 are late complaints, as the complainant was aware of them in 2016 and 2019. Complaints about liability orders are out of jurisdiction, as they were considered in courts.
-
Statement Not upheld Other 28-Feb-2023
Summary: Mr X complains the Council took enforcement action wrongly, and recovered funds for the debt from the wrong company. The Ombudsman finds no fault with the Council for the process of enforcement action. The Ombudsman has not investigated the part of the complaint about recovered funds, as the Council has already provided a remedy.
-
London Borough of Waltham Forest (22 015 265)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 24-Feb-2023
Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about Mr X’s council tax liability. The issues he complains about date back several years to 2004 and there is not a good reason for the delay in him bringing his complaint to the Ombudsman. In any event, the Council via its appeal process, and then the Valuation Tribunal, are best placed to consider challenges to council tax liability.
-
London Borough of Ealing (22 011 188)
Statement Upheld Other 23-Feb-2023
Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to properly consider her application for a Discretionary Housing Payment. Miss X also complained the Council failed to respond to her request for a review of her application. We did not find fault with the Council’s decision not to award Miss X a Discretionary Housing Payment. We found fault with the Council for delays in completing the review of Miss X’s Discretionary Housing Payment but this did not cause Miss X a significant personal injustice.