London Borough of Redbridge (18 018 255)

Category : Benefits and tax > Council tax

Decision : Upheld

Decision date : 11 Oct 2019

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mrs J complains the Council pursued recovery of council tax when her home became uninhabitable after the Council carried out works to the estate. She says it should apply a council tax reduction and discounts. There is fault by the Council for which it has provided an appropriate remedy.

The complaint

  1. The complainant whom I shall refer to as Mrs J, complains the Council unfairly pursued her for council tax arrears after her property was damaged and became uninhabitable following the Council’s works on the estate. She says the Council failed to assist her regarding discounts and a council tax reduction.

Back to top

What I have investigated

  1. I have investigated how the Council dealt with Mrs J’s council tax reduction claim and carers discount claim.
  2. However, I have not investigated the Council’s decisions regarding these claims as I explain in paragraph 34.
  3. I have not investigated the matters regarding the liability order hearing as I explain in paragraph 35.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)
  2. If we are satisfied with a council’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

How I considered this complaint

  1. I have discussed the complaint with the complainant and considered the complaint and the copy correspondence provided by the complainant. I have made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. I have also invited the complainant to comment on my draft decision and considered her comments.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Mrs J owns a leasehold property. The Council is the freeholder. She received the maximum council tax reduction based on her income.
  2. In 2017 she moved out to temporary accommodation because of flood damage which she says was caused by the Council’s negligence. She contacted the Council in June 2017 about council tax charges. The Council advised that no exemptions were awarded on empty and uninhabitable properties, but it suggested she contact her insurer to see if it would cover council tax.
  3. In August 2017 Mrs J’s councillor asked if the Council could waive the council tax. The Council considered this and agreed to award a discretionary reduction under section 13A of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. This power allows the Council to reduce the amount of council tax payable to nil having taken account of the charge payer’s circumstances. It suspended the council tax account while Mrs J’s home was being repaired.
  4. The Council advised Mrs J’s councillor and Mrs J that she needed to confirm when she moved back into the property. Mrs J said in March 2018 that she was still in temporary accommodation. In May 2018 the Council checked with the insurance company and advised that works on Mrs J’s home had been completed in April 2018. The Council reduced the council tax to nil for the period that Mrs J’s home was being repaired and on 12 June 2018 issued a council tax bill for the period from April 2018 to Mrs J.
  5. As Mrs J did not pay the first instalment of £91, the Council sent a reminder to her in July. Mrs J called the Council and said she could not afford to pay because she was on income support. The Council’s notes of the call show an advisor said she should make an online claim for council tax reduction as soon as possible.
  6. Mrs J called a week later to say she was having problems claiming the council tax reduction online. The advisor said Mrs J should try to submit the form as soon as possible and add a covering letter regarding any problems.
  7. The same day the Council says it received an online claim for a carer’s council tax discount based on Mrs J being a carer for her ex husband. The Council also received an email from Mrs J saying she was applying for a council tax reduction. The Council replied that the form she had completed was for a discount on her council tax bill. It said that if, however, she would like to apply for a council tax reduction she should click on a link it provided within its email.
  8. The Council says it considered Mrs J’s application for a carers discount on 6 August 2018. But, while it decided that she did not qualify because the person she cared for did not live at the same property, it did not send a written notification.
  9. As Mrs J had not made the instalment payments required, the Council sent her a summons in September 2018. Mrs J called the Council on 28 September 2018 to say that she was waiting for her bill to be reduced as she had made a claim for a discount. She said the Council had not advised her it had decided she did not qualify for a carers discount. The Council’s advisor said Mrs J should claim a council tax reduction and ask for backdating. However, the Council’s scheme only allowed a maximum one month backdate. Mrs J was dissatisfied the Council had sent her a summons and added costs.
  10. In mid October Mrs J applied for a council tax reduction and asked the Council to backdate it to June 2018. She said she had not moved back to her home until June 2018. She said that she had claimed a carers discount, but the Council had not told her the outcome. Mrs J also complained it had delayed advising her to claim a council tax reduction. She asked the Council to waive the summons cost of £123.
  11. The Council obtained a liability order in court regarding Mrs J’s council tax arrears. Mrs J complained further that the Council had advised her it would cancel the summons. She said the summons was incorrect because the amount was wrong. She had not moved back to the properly until June 2018 and she had asked for council tax reduction backdating to June 2018. She said the difference between a council tax discount and council tax reduction was not clear on the Council’s website and on its form.
  12. The Council placed a hold on Mrs J’s account and assessed her council tax reduction claim in mid November 2018. It applied a reduction from 3 September 2018. It also revised Mrs J’s liability writing off the charge between April and June 2018.
  13. In response to her complaint it agreed it had not advised her regarding its decision not to apply a carers discount. It said Mrs J could not appeal this decision. As a remedy for failing to advise of the decision, it apologised and removed the summons costs from the account. Revising the start of liability had reduced the amount due by £151. The outstanding amount was now £278. The Council said it could not backdate further than 3 September 2018. While it accepted Mrs J’s email at the end of July 2018 could be seen as an intent to claim, she had not responded within a month when the Council had advised her to make a claim. The Council said that Mrs J could request a reconsideration of its decision on her backdate request within one month. It suggested she could claim a hardship payment towards her council tax.
  14. Mrs J complained further that the Council had not apologised, and she said it had victimised her. She felt the Council was forcing her to make incorrect payments as the summons amount was incorrect. She said she had made payments. She had complained without response, but the Council had gone ahead and obtained a liability order. She complained the Council’s form regarding carers discounts was unclear and could affect other carers. She said the Council’s actions had a severe impact on her mental health.
  15. The Council responded to Mrs J’s complaint in early January 2019. It confirmed it upheld her complaint that it had not advised her regarding the carers discount, and the remedy for this was withdrawing the recovery action and reinstating instalments. It said it had effectively recognised that it had not resolved her complaint when it pursued the liability order hearing. It had withdrawn the action and costs as a result. The Council did not uphold her complaint that had not given her notice it had started action on her account again because it said it had advised her in its complaint response. The Council said it had explained why it could not apply a carers discount. It accepted that it was ‘not entirely accurate’ to say there was no appeal against the decision not to award a carers discount. It apologised and gave details of how to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. However, it commented it did not feel the Tribunal would make a different decision.
  16. The Council noted that its carer discount form may not be clear that the person being cared for must live with the carer. The Council said it would review its form by the end of February 2019. The Council said it had ceased its enforcement action. However, £63 was due for the December instalment. It invited Mrs J to claim a council tax Hardship Payment.
  17. In February 2019 the Council sent Mrs J a reminder regarding the council tax as she had not paid in accordance with its instalments. Mrs J paid a lump sum but it did not clear the outstanding council tax. Mrs J complained to the Ombudsman regarding the Council pursuing council tax unfairly.
  18. One week later the Council sent a summons to Mrs J adding £123 costs. Mrs J says she was forced to attend the liability order hearing with difficulty as she had to arrange getting her children into school and she needed to arrange for her disabled ex husband to attend the hearing to assist her. However, the Council adjourned the hearing at the last minute. Mrs J said she would not claim a Hardship Payment because that would be accepting the liability was correct when it was not.

Analysis

  1. I consider there was fault by the Council because it did not advise Mrs J that it had turned down her carers discount application. However, I consider that the Council addressed this correctly because it withdrew the summons and liability order and costs in November 2018. It has apologised. Therefore, I find that it provided an appropriate remedy.
  2. The Council was also at fault regarding the comment it made that Mrs J could not appeal its decision. I consider the Council remedied this in January 2019 when it confirmed Mrs J could appeal.
  3. Mrs J complains the Council did not advise her regarding how to claim a council tax reduction. I have considered this, but it appears the Council did advise Mrs J to claim a council tax reduction on 19 July 2018. It also emailed her to advise her she could claim council tax reduction when she submitted the carers discount form. It advised her again on 28 September 2018 when she called. I have not found there is fault here.
  4. The Council has confirmed its 2018/19 council tax reduction scheme permits a maximum backdate of one month for working age claimants. If Mrs J disagrees with the Council’s decision, I consider it reasonable to expect her to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.
  5. The Council has reviewed its carers discount application form. However, it has not changed it. Mrs J says she found it difficult and apparently did not realise that it was not a council tax reduction claim. She said it did not clearly state that the cared for person must live in the household. I do not consider there is fault by the Council here because the form does state it is a discount and in one section states that the carer must be resident in the same property as the person being cared for.
  6. Mrs J say the Council continued recovery action when she did not consider the complaint resolved. However, the Council had completed its complaint procedure in January 2019 and it had advised the amounts outstanding. When Mrs J did not pay or make an arrangement, I consider it was not at fault in pursuing recovery.
  7. Mrs J complains the Council did not assist her. But I consider the Council did provide assistance and advice at each stage. It waived liability for the period she was away from her home. It revised the liability when Mrs J provided evidence she had moved back later. It advised her to claim a council tax reduction. It also suggested she claimed a hardship payment. However, she is unwilling to do this as she believes the liability is not correct. I have not found fault here. It is open to Mrs J to make claim for a hardship payment.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. The Council has provided a suitable remedy for its fault and so I have completed my investigation and closed the complaint.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

  1. 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). I do not see there are good reasons why Mrs J cannot or could not appeal to the Valuation Tribunal regarding the Council’s decision on her backdate request and her carers discount application.
  2. Mrs J complained regarding the Council’s actions at the liability order hearing in April 2019. However, we cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended).

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