Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s council tax. This is because the injustice from no online access is not significant enough to justify our involvement. We will not investigate other parts of Mr X’s complaint because he can appeal, and there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X says he has not been able to access his council tax account online. He also complains the Council gave him false information and that it has not paid his full council tax support. He says this has affected him emotionally and financially.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 or continue an investigation if we decide
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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).
4. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained the Council’s online council tax account system was not accessible to him for a long time. The Council accepted a small number of people were unable to access their accounts. It said it believed it had resolved the problem, but it would now investigate further. It apologised and said it had sent a paper bill in the meantime.
7. The Council said it had advised Mr X of his entitlement to council tax support in March 2025. It had reviewed his council tax support in July. His entitlement reduced because his income had changed and he had not notified the Council about this.
8. The Council disagreed with Mr X’s complaint that officers had been dishonest. It said all customers were treated equally according to guidelines and regulations.
9. The injustice is not significant enough for our involvement regarding Mr X’s complaint about accessing the Council’s online system. The Council has sent paper bills to Mr X so it has adhered to the required council tax regulations for notifying customers.
10. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if he considers the Council’s council tax support decision is wrong.
11. There is not enough evidence of fault regarding Mr X’s complaint that Council officers gave false information.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement regarding online access. Mr X can appeal the Council’s decision regarding his council tax support and there is not enough evidence of fault about officers giving false information.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman