Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has refused to pay compensation after it took higher council tax payments from the complainant’s bank account than it should have done. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, wants compensation because the Council took an extra £433 in council tax from his account.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. In August the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) told the Council it had cancelled Mr X’s Universal Credit (UC) from June because Mr X had moved abroad. The Council cancelled Mr X’s Council Tax Support (CTS) and issued a new council tax bill with increased payments. The payments increased from £139 a month to £339. The Council issued a new bill in August which detailed the new payments.
5. Mr X told the Council he had not gone abroad. Mr X also contacted the DWP who subsequently reinstated the UC. On 14 September the Council received confirmation of the new UC award and on 1 October it reassessed the CTS.
6. Mr X paid higher amounts of council tax in September and October.
7. In October and November the Council refunded £250 and £183 to Mr X. And it reset the instalments to £139 from 10 December. The Council declined Mr X’s request for compensation.
8. Mr X says the Council should pay compensation because the increased payments caused stress and financial pressure. He says the Council should have processed the new CTS claim more quickly.
9. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council had to cancel the CTS when it was told Mr X’s UC had ended. As a result the Council had to increase the monthly instalments so Mr X could pay the council tax within the financial year. The Council received notification of the new UC award on 14 September and processed the CTS claim on 1 October. This processing time does not represent undue delay or fault.
10. In addition, the Council refunded some of the excess payments and reduced the instalments once the CTS was back in payment.
11. I appreciate these events have caused difficulty for Mr X but they do not flow from fault by the Council so there is no reason to start an investigation or ask for compensation.
12. Mr X could make a complaint to the DPW if it feels it made an error when it cancelled his UC.

Back to top

Final decision

13. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman