Summary: the complainant says the Council failed to properly calculate a refund of council tax, explain its calculation or comply with the complaints’ procedure. The Council recognised its fault but says it paid the refund promptly. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall refer to as Mr X says the Council failed to:
• Provide accurate bills for the seven years council tax correction owed to him leading to a shortfall in the Council’s proposed refund;
• Properly review its calculations;
• Investigate and respond to Mr X’s complaint without avoidable delay and in line with the Council’s own complaints procedure.
2. Mr X says this has caused him inconvenience because he went to great trouble to provide accurate accounts and information on which the Council could base its calculations. Mr X wants the Council to explain its failings in both its calculations and failure to comply with its own complaints’ procedure. In future Mr X wants the Council to adhere to its complaints procedure and respond to complaints in a timely way.

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. If 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)
5. 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)
6. 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

7. In considering this complaint I have:
• Contacted Mr X and examined the information presented with his complaint;
• Put enquiries to the Council and reviewed its responses;
• Researched relevant law, policy and practice;
• Shared with Mr X and the Council my draft decision and reflected on comments received.

Back to top

What I found

8. In March 2019 Mr X raised a query on his annual Council Tax bill because he believed the charge may be inaccurate. The Council asked Mr X to confirm the date his property became furnished. Following Mr X’s confirmation of the date the Council updated the records showing the property as furnished but empty from 1 August 2013. This resulted in an overpayment of Council Tax and in April 2019 the Council offered a refund.
9. Council tax charges vary according to value, whether the property is occupied, furnished and the number of occupants. The Council says its records show it inspected Mr X’s property in 2013 and 2014 and found the property empty. However, the records do not clearly show the property as furnished then.
10. When recalculating Mr X’s council tax liability the Council issued amended statements. However, the statements did not show the Council intended to transfer part of the credit to the current year’s council tax bill. This resulted in a shortfall in the refund. Mr X had therefore unintentionally paid his current council tax in advance. Without statements showing a credit transfer to the current year, and without anyone telling Mr X that is what the Council had done, Mr X had to work out how the shortfall had occurred.
11. Mr X provided his bank account details for the transfer of the refund but queried the Council’s calculation. On 12 April 2019 Mr X asked the Council to provide detailed calculations but meanwhile to pay the refund it had offered.
12. Without an explanation of the shortfall Mr X complained about the service he received on 14 April 2019.
13. Mr X says the Council failed to comply with its complaints’ procedure. On 15 April 2019 the Council confirmed receipt of the complaint and said Mr X would receive:
• A response within 28 days of his complaint’s receipt;
• The name of the officer dealing with his complaint;
• A reference number to use when contacting the Council.
14. Mr X says the Council did not tell him which officer would deal with the complaint and so it breached its complaints procedure.
15. While considering the complaint under the complaints’ procedure, the Council paid the refund on 24 April 2019.
16. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint at stage 1 of the complaints’ procedure on 30 April 2019. Mr X asked the Council to review the complaint under stage 2 of the complaints’ procedure on 7 May 2019. In an email sent that day Mr X told the Council he had not received the service as outlined in the complaints’ procedure. He also said he had asked many times for corrected bills for the previous council tax years to reflect the Council’s second corrections. Although the Council had corrected the refund Mr X said he needed a full new set of the corrected council tax bills (following the second corrections). Mr X could then check they showed the correct values. Without those corrected bills Mr X paid sums into his council tax account to avoid any potential missed payment.
17. The Council sent updated council tax bills to Mr X on 9 May 2019. Then the Council and Mr X agreed a payment schedule for the current year.
18. The Council responded at stage 2 on 20 June 2019. In commenting on my draft decision Mr X says the Council sent this response to an incorrect email address. Mr X says previously the Council sent paper copies of its responses to his correspondence address or the property address as well as by email. It did not do so or check with Mr X that he had received the response. This, Mr X says, compounded the error.
19. In its response to the complaint the Council accepts it did not provide the name of the officer responsible for the complaint under the procedure. The Council apologised but said the officer who dealt with the complaint made it clear she was responsible for the responses given.
20. Mr X also complained the Council did not tell him how he could escalate his complaint to Stage 2 of the complaints’ procedure. The Council recognised this and said it had reminded staff they should make it clear customers have the right to escalate their complaint to Stage 2 if they remain dissatisfied.
21. Under the Council’s complaints’ procedure, it copies stage 2 responses to the Head of Customer Services. The Council says this is to encourage corporate learning from complaints. Mr X said this could not happen because the Council had not yet appointed someone to the vacant post. Therefore, the Council had not complied with this part of the procedure.
22. The Council responded by saying another senior officer had covered the responsibility for the post of Head of Customer Services. To make this clear the Council said it would add a section to the complaints policy to show other officers would have delegated authority to cover vacancies when necessary.
23. In its response, the Council also accepted the officers did not correctly ask Mr X whether he wanted the Council to transfer the credit to cover any current or future liability. The Council may transfer credits to cover other debts under the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992. However, it cannot do so if the council taxpayer has asked it not to. In his email of 9 April 2019 Mr X told the Council he believed it had mistakenly included the council tax remaining for that council tax year. That meant he had paid his council tax in advance which he says he did not want to do. The Council did not recognise the error until after Mr X complained formally about the service received and therefore, he believes missed an opportunity to resolve the matter earlier.
24. The Council says it refunded the overpayment within five weeks of his challenge to the council tax charge.

Analysis- has there been fault leading to injustice?

25. My role is to consider how the Council responded to Mr X’s challenge to its calculations and his complaint. If I find fault I must consider if that fault caused an injustice and what the Council should do to address that injustice.
26. Clearly the Council’s records do not record whether Mr X’s property although empty, met the classification of ‘furnished’. On receipt of Mr X’s challenge to the council tax bills the Council recalculated those bills accepting his property met the classification as empty furnished property. That led to a refund.
27. In offering a refund the Council should provide a clear explanation of its calculations. It did not explain or show clearly it had transferred some of the overpayment to Mr X’s current council tax liability, in effect paying it in advance. That may have an advantage to the Council, remove from Mr X the need to continue with payments throughout the year and is permitted under the Regulations. However, it is for Mr X to decide whether he wanted to pay the current council tax in advance. The Council acted prematurely in deciding to assign part of the overpayment. It should not have done so without explaining its proposal to Mr X and giving him the opportunity to exercise his right to receive the full refund.
28. I find the Council at fault for the poor recording of the transfer and the failure to explain its proposal to Mr X, and in denying him his right to object.
29. With the faults found in the original revaluations Mr X asked for amended council tax bills. The Council should have provided amended bills when it recalculated the refund. Mr X understandably wanted to check the second set of bills to be sure no further errors had occurred. I find the Council at fault for not providing the bills without Mr X asking for them and putting him to that trouble.
30. The Council did not comply with its complaints’ procedure. Councils should make it clear who the named officer is who is conducting the complaints procedure and that they have authority to decide and respond on the Council’s behalf. I find the Council at fault for failing to do so.
31. The Council did not make clear the right to a review of a stage 1 complaint through the stage 2 procedure. Responses should have standard information about the right to a further review. I find the Council at fault for this failure.
32. The failures caused a loss of confidence in the complaints procedure by Mr X putting him to avoidable time and inconvenience in challenging the Council’s responses.
33. The Council did not recognise that in his email of April 2019 Mr X made it clear he did not want to pay his council tax in advance. The Council should have noted that before the matter reached the complaint stage. In effect Mr X had exercised his right under the Regulations to say he did not want his current council tax credited with any part of the overpayment. I find the Council at fault in not recognising that as an instruction not to withhold part of the refund.
34. I recognise the Council made the refund within five weeks of the challenge and I find no undue delay in that refund. However, the failings identified I find put Mr X to avoidable time and inconvenience for which he should receive a remedy.

Recommended action

35. To address the injustice arising from the faults identified I recommend, and the Council agrees to within four weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Mr X;
• Pay Mr X £200 in recognition of the avoidable time and inconvenience caused;
• Share the decision with the Head of Customer Services for feeding into reviews of the complaints and council tax services and with officers in both sections to reinforce learning from the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

36. In completing my investigation, I find the Council acted with fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman