Summary: Miss X complains the Council has not carried out the review of her appeal on Council Tax debt. This means she has not been able to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for delaying Miss X’s appeal rights and for not suitably managing communication with Miss X. This caused distress, confusion, and a delay in Miss X’s appeal rights to tribunal. The Council has agreed to issue a decision on the review, provide Miss X with a breakdown of the debt, and pay a financial remedy for the distress and confusion caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to acknowledge or accept her appeal about Council Tax liability. This meant she could not exercise her right to appeal to tribunal about the decision.
2. Miss X also complains the Council has failed to explain where the debt has come from and has not properly communicated with her about the review.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), 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

What I have and have not investigated

7. I have not considered the part of Miss X’s complaint about her liability for the debt. This is because it is a matter for the tribunal to decide if Miss X is liable.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered Miss X’s complaint and information she provided. I also considered information from the Council.
9. I considered comments from Miss X and the Council on a draft of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

Council tax reduction

10. Council tax reduction (CTR, also known as council tax support) is a discount, not a benefit. If a council gives someone too much CTR it can reduce the CTR and so increase the council tax owed. We call these changes CTR reversals. Sometimes a council creates reversals because it has miscalculated the CTR, perhaps ignoring information it had, or using information it should have not used.
11. If the council’s CTR Scheme says how it deals with challenges to reversals (sometimes called ‘overpayments’) a claimant can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. If the scheme does not say how the council will deal with CTR reversals the claimant cannot appeal.
12. Councils can award discretionary CTR to reduce a claimant’s council tax, using their powers under S13A(1)(c) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (as amended). Each council should have its own scheme. Somebody experiencing financial hardship because of a decision about wrongly paid council tax reduction, can apply for a discretionary reduction. Appeals about those decisions are to the Valuation Tribunal.
13. The Councils website says if an applicant disagrees with a decision it makes about council tax reduction, applicants can ask the Council to look at it again. Applicants can also appeal to a tribunal about a council tax reduction decision.
14. The tribunal process says that applicants need to make an application within two months of the decision date from the Council.

What happened

15. Miss X was previously receiving a Council Tax reduction as she had two dependants. The Council wrote to Miss X asking her to provide further information about the dependants as it believed Miss X’s circumstances had changed and she no longer had two dependants. It had calculated that she now owed a debt due to an overpayment of Council Tax reduction support.
16. Miss X sent evidence to the Council in November 2022. She did not hear from the Council again until February 2023. The Council told her it did not believe this was enough information and requested further information.
17. Miss X asked the Council for further clarification on the evidence needed on 2nd May 2023. She also asked the Council to review the amount it said she owed as she did not understand why she owed the debt.
18. On 9th May 2023 the Council decided to treat the contact from Miss X as a request for a review. It assigned an officer to carry out the review and told Miss X of this. It also told her what further evidence it needed and gave a deadline of June 2023.
19. On 26th May 2023, Miss X complained to the Council that it had not told her the reason for the debt, and it had not properly considered the information sent in November 2022.
20. The Council’s stage one response said it had looked at the previous evidence, but this wasn’t the evidence it needed, and that it had assigned an officer to carry out a review. It again asked Miss X to provide the evidence requested on 9th May 2023.
21. Miss X asked to escalate her complaint to stage two as she felt the Council had still not carried out a review of the debt.
22. The Council’s stage two response said it had agreed to carry out a review of the decision, but that it still needed the evidence from Miss X. It accepted there had been a delay in looking at the evidence initially received from Miss X.
23. Between June 2023 and August 2023, Miss X continued to ask the Council to explain how it had calculated the debt and carry out the review.
24. Miss X remained unhappy and bought her complaint to the Ombudsman in August 2023.

Analysis

25. As outlined in paragraph 8, I cannot consider whether Miss X is liable for the debt, but I can consider whether the Council properly considered Miss X’s request for a review.
26. The Council says it treated Miss X’s contact on 2nd May as a request for a review and assigned an officer to complete the review. The Council indicates that it hasn’t been able to carry out the review because Miss X hasn’t sent the further information requested. Miss X says she doesn’t understand what the debt is for or why the Council needs further information.
27. The tribunal process says that Miss X cannot appeal to tribunal unless she has a decision from the Council about the review.
28. The Council acknowledged that Miss X was asking for a review of the decision about the Council Tax reduction. The Council should have issued a decision on the review in a timely manner. This would have given Miss X her appeal rights to tribunal.
29. I appreciate the Council says it was waiting for Miss X to provide more information. However, if Miss X did not give the information by the deadline, the Council should have closed the appeal and given Miss X her appeal rights. Instead, the Council continued to repeat itself and failed to give a decision. Failing to carry out the appeal in a timely manner was fault by the Council, which delayed Miss X’s appeal rights to tribunal.
30. There was also further fault by the Council, as it is clear from the communication that Miss X does not understand where the debt has come from and how it has been calculated. From the documents provided by the Council, I cannot see any communication that it told Miss X of the debt, explained where it came from or how it was calculated. Miss X became aware of the debt when she logged onto her account and saw a large amount outstanding. This is poor communication and complaint handling by the Council, which has continued to cause distress and confusion to Miss X.
31. There was also delay in the Council reviewing the information provided by Miss X in November 2022, as it did not review it or update her until February 2023. This was fault by the Council, which has prolonged the uncertainty experienced by Miss X.
32. In response to my draft decision, the Council set out the service improvements it has made within the Council Tax department to ensure issues such as this are not repeated. I am satisfied the Councils actions mean no recommendations for further service improvements from the Ombudsman are needed.

Back to top

Agreed action

33. Within 4 weeks the Council has agreed to

• Write to Miss X and apologise for the delay in deciding the review.
• Issue a decision for the review. This gives Miss X her appeal rights to tribunal.
• Give Miss X a breakdown and explanation of the debt and how the Council calculated it.
• Pay Miss X £150 in recognition of the distress and uncertainty caused to Miss X because of the maladministration.

34. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I have completed my investigation. I find fault with the Council for delaying Miss X’s appeal rights to tribunal, and for failing to suitably manage communication about her outstanding debt.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman