Harborough District Council (24 002 241)

Category : Benefits and tax > Council tax support

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 25 Jun 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will use our discretion not to investigate this complaint about a council tax support overpayment and a fraud investigation.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, Mrs X, says the Council failed to provide financial information over a 10 year period about her council tax support (CTS). She was threatened with legal action and had to pay financial penalties. The Council caused stress and upset and sent confusing letters. Mrs X wants the Council to provide evidence of how it calculated the council tax arrears from 2013.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
  3. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support.
  4. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and some of the CTS decisions. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. In 2023 the Council decided it had paid too much CTS to Mrs X from 2013. The amount of the overpayment was added to the council tax bill creating significant arrears.
  2. The Council did a fraud investigation and decided Mrs X had failed to properly disclose her income in relation to the CTS from 2013. The Council decided there were grounds to prosecute but, as an alternative, it offered a financial penalty. Mrs X accepted the financial penalty; the Council did not prosecute.
  3. Mrs X disputes the CTS figures and says the Council did not provide the information to show the arrears are correct. Mrs X is unhappy the Council threatened criminal charges.
  4. Mrs X is correct to say the Council threatened legal action; this is because it decided it had enough evidence to prosecute. Mrs X could have declined the financial penalty and instead raised a defence in court in response to a prosecution. The court would have decided if Mrs X had committed an offence.
  5. Mrs X questions whether the figures are correct and says the Council has not provided the financial information about the CTS and council tax arrears. During the 10 year period the Council sent regular CTS decisions which showed the income it was using. Mrs X had the chance to check the figures for each decision and query or challenge the figures at the time. The overpayment decision letters show the figures used by the Council. I appreciate the letters can seem confusing but that is partly due to the complexity of the CTS system and partly because the overpayment is for 10 years.
  6. If Mrs X thought the overpayment decision was wrong, or that the Council had used inaccurate figures, she could have appealed to the Valuation Tribunal. It is reasonable to expect her to have done this because the tribunal is free to use and could have determined if the amount added to the council tax bill, due to the CTS, was correct. In addition, Mrs X could have challenged the figures in any of the bills over the 10 year period.
  7. I appreciate Mrs X has been upset by what happened, and may think she has been overcharged, but it is not our role to check the figures given that Mrs X could have allowed the case to be tested in court or appealed to the tribunal.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will use our discretion not to investigate this complaint because Mrs X could have used her appeal rights or declined the financial penalty and allowed the case to be considered in court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings