Summary: Ms B and Mr X complain about the way the Council has dealt with Ms B’s council tax liability for her second property and about its communication with them in connection with this matter. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainants, who I refer to as Ms B and Mr X, say the Council wrongly charged Ms B council tax for a property she owns and which the complainants say should be liable for business rates instead. They say it was wrong of the Council to seek a Liability Order for council tax arrears for the property and they complain about the behaviour of a Council officer dealing with the case and the Council’s decision not to communicate with Ms B via her representative, Mr X.

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 would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Ms B and Mr X and by the Council. I gave the complainants the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what they said.

Back to top

What I found

6. Ms B owns a second property on which council tax arrears have arisen over time. The Council sought and obtained a Liability Order for the arrears from the court.
7. Ms B, with the assistance of Mr X, sought to have the Liability Order set aside but she lost her challenge. Mr X has mental health problems and during the court hearing the Council says the judge stated that because of his health problems Mr X might not be best placed to deal with Ms B’s council tax arrears and that the judge obtained Ms B’s agreement that in future he would not do so.
8. Having had problems in communicating with Mr X, the Council told Ms B that it would not deal with him anymore and instead would only deal with her, or with an advice worker or solicitor.
9. Ms B complained to the Council about the court action it had taken against her and about the behaviour of one of its officers who had been dealing with her case.
10. The Council responded and referred her to its Empty Property Policy and the council tax charges which apply. It also explained why, as Mr X has no liability for council tax at the property, she could not claim a discount or exemption because of his mental health problems.
11. It explained that no court order had been made to stop Mr X acting as Ms B’s representative but that the judge had made a statement which, while not binding on the Council, it had used to support its decision not to communicate with him about Ms B’s council tax affairs. With regard to her claims about the officer’s behaviour and inappropriate telephone calls she said he had made and which she said she had copies of, it asked her to provide these so it could investigate matters further.
12. Dissatisfied with the Council’s decision not to uphold her complaint, Ms B complained to the Ombudsman.

Assessment

13. Ms B has a council tax liability for the property she owns but she does not live in. If she had wanted to challenge this liability she could have appealed to the Valuation Tribunal. As she has, or had, this right of appeal to the Tribunal we would not investigate this aspect of her complaint.
14. With regard to the action taken by the Council in pursuing the arrears and seeking a Liability Order, this is normal action taken by local authorities seeking payment of a debt. It has explained its decision, using the judge’s statement as further reason, why it will not communicate with Mr X about Ms B’s council tax. If there is evidence to support the complainants’ allegations against the officer they can provide this to the Council.
15. In responding to my draft decision, the complainants have referred to a change to business rates for the property and their request for small business relief. However, as they have already been told by the Council, if they wish to pursue this matter they need to make an application to the Valuation Tribunal to ask to have the property removed from the council tax records and brought into business rating.

Back to top

Final decision

16. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman