Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s Council Tax reduction scheme. This is because Ms Y has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal Service. We will not investigate other parts of this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council introduced a Council Tax Support Banding System based on misleading information, and without proper consultation. Mr X said the Council did not process his daughter, Ms Y’s payments, and did not offer a transitional scheme for those affected by increased payments. He said the new banding system had caused severe stress and financial difficulties. He would like the Council to review the banding scheme and refund council tax paid so far and introduce a staged payment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (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 or reduction.
4. 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council introduced a new Council Tax Support Scheme in April 2025. Changes to the scheme caused Ms Y to pay more council tax. Mr X complained to the Council about the changes to the scheme, stating they disadvantaged Ms Y. Ms Y appealed to the Valuation Tribunal Service about the Council’s introduction of its Council Tax Support Scheme in July 2025.
8. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this part of the complaint as a right of appeal to a tribunal has been used. This part of the complaint is therefore out of jurisdiction.
9. Mr X also complained the Council’s Exceptional Hardship payment was not a suitable transitional provision for residents that were affected by the Council Tax Support Scheme.
10. The Local Government Finance Act states that Councils must “include such transitional provision” “as the authority thinks fit” (Local Government Finance Act 1992, Schedule 1A, para. 5(4)). The Council included the Exceptional Hardship payment as part of its Council Tax Support Scheme.
11. We will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. The Local Government Finance Act 1992 allows Councils to determine arrangements for transitional provision. The Council introduced an Exceptional Hardship payment as part of its Council Tax Support Scheme.
12. Mr X complained the Council had issued Court Summons for outstanding council tax when payments had been made to the account. In response to enquiries, the Council said it sent a council tax reminder to Ms Y in May 2025. The Council advised Mr X on 29 May 2025 that it would not withhold recovery action until the Valuation Tribunal Appeal had concluded. The Council said a cash payment was made on 29 May 2025, but this did not bring the account up to date and therefore a Summons was issued in June 2025 for the outstanding balance.
13. In response to enquiries, the Council acknowledged it had delayed in processing two cheque payments to Ms Y’s account in July 2025. The Council said the delay in processing these payments did not alter enforcement proceedings. The Council extended its apologies to Mr X for the delay.
14. We will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. The Council extended its apologies for the delay in processing the cheques and confirmed the delay did not alter enforcement action.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We cannot investigate this complaint because Ms Y has used her right of appeal to the Tribunal. We will not investigate other parts of this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman