Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about council tax. This is because it was reasonable for her to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal, and it is unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman would achieve the outcome she wants.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Miss X, complains about how the Council has dealt with her council tax account. Miss X disputes the amount of council tax the Council says she owes. She also complains that incorrect information from the Council led to her incurring avoidable bank charges. Miss X wants her council tax bill recalculating and her bank charges refunding.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

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

3. 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)
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 Miss X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information she provided. I also gave Miss X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

6. Miss X complains that in July and August 2019, the Council wrote to say she owed c£2800 of council tax for July 2001 to July 2008. Miss X says her husband called the Council in August and it said there would be no action until October 2019 – by which point Miss X hoped the matter would have been resolved.
7. Miss X says the Council then called her at the beginning of September to say she did not owe the amount it had originally claimed. But the money had been taken from her account anyway. The Council said she would need to make an indemnity claim to her bank – this would allow her to claim back any charges from being overdrawn. Miss X is unhappy with the bank charges incurred and the amount of council tax the Council says she now owes.
8. The Council has responded to complaints from Miss X. It has said that when her husband called in August 2019, it said it would put her account on hold for 7 working days – during which time Miss X would need to contact the Council. It says Miss X did not do this, and the payment was taken from her account as the liable party for council tax. The Council has accepted it made a mistake in how it calculated Miss X’s council tax bill. It has explained to Miss X how it calculated the amount it says she now owes. The Council explained to Miss X she can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if she disputes its calculations.
9. The Ombudsman is not a right of appeal for people who disagree with their council tax bill. When there is a right of appeal to a tribunal, the Ombudsman normally expects them to use that right, unless it is unreasonable for them to do so. The Valuation Tribunal is an independent, expert body, set up by Parliament for people who want to challenge decisions about council tax or council tax support. I see no reason why Miss X could not have used her appeal rights. The Tribunal could have decided Miss X’s liability for council tax and how much she should pay. These are not decisions the Ombudsman can take.
10. The Ombudsman could consider the issue about whether the Council provided incorrect information about how long it would place Miss X’s account on hold for. But in the absence of independent witnesses, it is unlikely we could ever establish with certainty what was said. An investigation is not therefore appropriate. While frustrating for Miss X, an indemnity claim is the most likely way she can achieve her desired outcome of her bank’s charges being refunded.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because it was reasonable for Miss X to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. It is unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman would achieve the outcome she wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman