Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council will not pay the complainant interest or compensation following a change in his council tax band. We are unlikely to find evidence of fault causing the complainant injustice that justifies our involvement.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr B, has complained the Council will not pay him interest or compensation following a change to his liability to pay council tax. He believes he is entitled to this because he has been paying too much council tax since 1998.

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’.
3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault;
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered what Mr B said in his complaint which included the Council’s responses to his concerns.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. The primary legislation for council tax is the Local Government Finance Act 1992 The main secondary legislation concerned with collection and recovery is the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992.
6. The Valuation Office Agency (VOA) decides the banding of a property for council tax. Councils have to calculate council tax bills based on information provided by the VOA.
7. There is no provision in the legislation to pay interest on council tax paid before the VOA alters the banding of a property.

Summary of events

8. In 2020, Mr B asked the VOA to review the banding of his home. As a result, the VOA altered the banding with effect from 1 March 1998. In effect, this meant Mr B had paid more than he needed and was entitled to a refund.
9. The VOA notified the Council of its decision and within a few days it refunded about £6,000 to Mr B.
10. Mr B queried the amount refunded by the Council. It explained it had used part of the council tax to pay what remained of his current liability in accordance with the Regulations. It also said it had to retrieve archived information for the earliest period and refunded a further £158 in late December 2020.
11. Mr B told the Council in January 2021 he had received all that was due to him but said he wanted interest and compensation because the Council had overcharged him for 23 years.

Analysis

12. The Council did not overcharge Mr B. It based his liability on information provided by the VOA and so billed him correctly. There is no basis on which to ask the Council to pay Mr B compensation.
13. There is no provision in the legislation to pay interest when liability for council tax is altered. There is no basis on which to ask the Council to pay Mr B interest.
14. Further, Mr B could have asked the VOA to review the banding of the property at any time. The Council was not responsible for any delay in this.
15. There is nothing to suggest any other fault by the Council. It is reasonable the Council took longer to find information for the earliest period the VOA’s decision related to. I do not therefore consider there was unreasonable delay in making the refund of £158. Even of this was not the case, the interest on this amount over a few weeks would be negligible.

Back to top

Final decision

16. I have decided we will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council causing Mr B significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman