Summary: Miss X complains about how the Council dealt with her Council Tax Support backdating application. There were some faults by the Council which caused Miss X distress, frustration and time and trouble. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s approach and delays in dealing with her council tax support backdating application.
2. Miss X says the Council’s failing caused her personal and emotional distress, financial strain and the time and trouble she was put to chasing the matter and making complaints.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I discussed the complaint with Miss X and considered the information she provided. I also considered the information the Council provided.
8. I sent Miss X and the Council a copy of my draft decision and considered all comments received before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and Guidance

9. Council Tax Support (CTS) is a reduction of the amount of council tax (CT) payable. Since 2013, each council is responsible for running their own local CTS schemes for help with council tax. The amount of discount awarded is based on a claimant’s savings, family make up, and income. It is paid by reducing the council tax owed and issuing a new council tax bill.
10. The law requires people to pay council tax as billed by a council even if they have applied for a discount or reduction.
11. Councils can require applicants for council tax support to supply financial information, such as proof of earnings or savings, before they can assess an application.
12. Council tax appeals should first be made to the billing authority. If the appeal is not successful, there is a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal (Local Government Finance Act 1992).

The Council’s CTS Appeal Process

13. If a claimant disagrees with the Council’s CTS decision, the claimant must first contact the Council in writing explaining why they believe the decision to be wrong. The Council have 2 months to reply to the claimant’s contact.
14. If the Council do not agree with the claimant’s reasons for the decision being wrong, the claimant can the appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.
15. If the Council failed to respond to the claimant’s contact within 4 months, the claimant can refer their matter to the Valuation Tribunal without the Council’s decision.

What happened

16. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
17. In April 2021, Miss X applied for council tax support (CTS). The Council awarded Miss X CTS with a start date of 19 April 2021.
18. Miss X requested the Council backdate her CTS award to cover the period 10 January 2021 to 18 April 2021.
19. In May 2021, the Council refused Miss X’s CTS backdating request. It said Miss X did not provide it with any valid reason or any evidence to show she had a good cause for failing to make an earlier claim and that the good cause was continuous up to the date the backdating claim was made. The Council said Miss X was therefore not entitled to backdated CTS for the period she requested. It advised Miss X of her review/appeal right.
20. The following day, Miss X submitted a review request/appeal against the Council’s refusal decision to backdate her CTS. Miss X explained she had contracted COVID-19 in January 2021 which seriously affected her health and financial situation during the backdating period she requested. She said she applied for the CTS after she had claimed universal credit and she was told she could make a CTS claim through the Council. Miss X submitted medical evidence and her bank statements in support of her backdating application.
21. In early August 2021, Miss X chased the Council for its response to her appeal. By mid-August, Miss X was issued a court summons notice. It was for Miss X’s outstanding council tax (CT) amount for financial year 2020/21 (£44) and 2021/22 (£357). Miss X said she borrowed some money which she used to pay off her CT bill. At the end of the month, the Council withdrew the court summons.
22. In September 2021, the Council apologised for its delay in responding to Miss X’s appeal. Following the review of Miss X’s case, it acknowledged Miss X said she suffered long term effects from contracting COVID-19 in January 2021. But the Council said her bank statements showed she was able to visit her local shops throughout February and March 2021 prior to making her CTS application in April 2021. The Council considered Miss X did not have a continuous good cause for failing to make her backdating claim sooner than she did, so she was not entitled to the backdated benefit. It maintained its initial refusal decision and advised if Miss X remained dissatisfied, she could make an appeal against its decision.
23. At the end of September 2021, Miss X made a further review request/appeal against the Council’s refusal decision. Miss X clarified it was her adult child who assisted her with the shopping trips during the February/ March 2021 period the Council mentioned. She also reiterated the effect the COVID-19 virus had on her at the time.
24. In February 2022, the Council reviewed Miss X’s case and the additional information she provided to it in September 2021. The Council decided Miss X had shown good cause for not making her CTS backdating claim sooner. The Council awarded Miss X the backdated CTS to cover the period she requested - 10 January to 18 April 2021. Following the Council’s award decision, it asked Miss X to provide her proof of income and capital for the period 10 January to 18 April 2021.
25. In March 2022, Miss X complained to the Council. This was due to the Council’s delay in awarding her the backdated CTS.
26. On 23 March 2022, the Council issued its stage 1 response to Miss X’s complaint. It apologised to Miss X for its delay in assessing her case and for requesting her bank statements again in February 2022. It acknowledged Miss X had previously provided it with the requested evidence in May 2021. The Council accepted it could have processed Miss X’s case sooner than it did which it said raised a staff training need to improve its overall service. The Council upheld Miss X’s complaint. It processed and awarded her backdated CTS to cover the period 10 January to 18 April 2021. The Council advised Miss X of her appeal right to the Valuation Tribunal if she remained dissatisfied with its decision.
27. Miss X told the Council it had initially made wrong decisions to refuse her backdating CTS claim based on the information from her bank statements. She asked the Council to compensate her for the distress its initial refusal decisions caused to her.
28. In May 2022, the Council responded to Miss X. It explained its initial May 2021 and its September 2021 refusal decisions were made because there was no evidence at the time to show Miss X had good cause for not making her CTS backdating claim sooner. The Council said it was not until Miss X made her further review request at the end of September 2021 that it became clearer she had good cause so it awarded the backdated CTS in March 2022. The Council apologised for any distress caused to Miss X but said it would not pay any compensation to her. The Council acknowledged its delay in assessing Miss X’s backdated CTS award in 2022. It explained it froze Miss X’s CT account from 18 March to 29 April 2022 to prevent any court action for Miss X. The Council said Miss X did not incur any cost penalties.
29. Miss X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response. She made a complaint to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

30. There were some failings in how the Council dealt with Miss X’s backdated CTS application.
31. I note Miss X considers the Council should not have assumed she made the shopping trips between February and March 2021 which led to its refusal decision on her first review request in May 2021. This is a decision the Council was entitled to make on the information available to it at the time. If Miss X was dissatisfied, she could have made an appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. Miss X requested a further review of the Council’s refusal decision which it reconsidered. This was not fault.
32. The Council was at fault for its delays in dealing with Miss X’s backdated CTS application. It took the Council 4 months to consider Miss X’s first review request (May to September 2021) and 6 months to consider her second review request (September 2021 to March 2022). The Council delayed Miss X’s first review request by 2 months and her second review request by 4 months (taking into account the 2 months allowed in the Council Appeal process to consider appeals). This was a significant delay, and it was fault. The Council could have made its decision to award Miss X the backdated CTS sooner. It could have made that decision in September 2021 when it became clearer that Miss X had good cause for not making her CTS backdating claim sooner. This caused Miss X distress, frustration and the time and trouble chasing the Council and complaining.
33. I acknowledge Miss X said she had to borrow some money to pay off her CT bills in 2021. Miss X was issued with a court summons notice in August 2021 for her 2020/21 and 2021/22 outstanding CT bills which the Council later withdrew. This was not fault. This is because by law, people are required to pay CT as billed by a council even if they have applied for a discount or reduction.

Back to top

Agreed action

34. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, the Council has agreed to complete the following within one month of the final decision:

• apologise in writing to Miss X and pay her £150. This is to acknowledge the distress, frustration and the time and trouble caused by the Council’s delays in dealing with her council tax support backdating application
• by training or other means remind staff of the importance of dealing with claimants’ applications in a timely manner in line with the Council’s appeal process timescales. Explain what steps the Council will take to monitor performance against timescales
• as regards the Council’s statement in its stage 1 response to Miss X’s complaint dated 23 March 2022, confirm if any staff training to improve the Council’s overall service has been completed. Provide evidence.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I find evidence of fault by the Council leading to injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy the injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman