Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council reassessed the complainant’s Council Tax Support and council tax. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council keeps changing his council tax and that it ignored evidence he sent. Mr X wants a goodwill payment for the stress this caused.

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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (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. This includes the complaint correspondence and decision letters about his Council Tax Support (CTS). I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X contacted the Council on 28 November to query why his council tax had increased and kept changing. He contacted the complaints team rather than the council tax or benefits team. Mr X sent a file which included information about his health and employment. The complaints team forwarded the enquiry to the benefits team but did not pass on the file.
5. The CTS team responded to Mr X on 1 December. It explained his council tax had increased because his CTS had stopped because he had started work. The benefits team invited Mr X to provide additional information about his employment. The reply was based on the information held by the CTS team at that point which did not include the information in Mr X’s file.
6. Mr X complained again and said he only worked for four days; he questioned whether anyone had read his file.
7. The Council wrote to Mr X on 15 December and said it had reassessed his CTS claim to reflect that he had not worked since the end of October. It issued a new council tax bill, for a reduced amount, and said the account was in credit. The Council awarded £70 from the household support fund and invited Mr X to get in touch if thought the new CTS decision wrong.
8. The Council apologised for not sending the file to the benefits team following his initial enquiry. It explained there had been staff changes which had caused the error.
9. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. The Council made an error and did not forward Mr X’s file to the benefits team. This meant the CTS team did not know Mr X had only worked for four days. But, the CTS was reviewed and corrected on 15 December and a new CT bill was issued. I acknowledge Mr X found the events stressful but the CTS was quickly corrected, the Council apologised and explained what had gone wrong, and Mr X has not suffered a financial loss. For these reasons there is not enough injustice to require an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman