Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (21 004 299)

Category : Benefits and tax > Council tax

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 12 Aug 2021

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to impose an empty property council tax premium. This is because the complainant can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if she disagrees with the Council’s decision.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, who I will call Mrs C, complains about the Council’s decision to impose an empty property council tax premium on a property she owns.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  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)
  2. 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

  1. I considered information provided by Mrs C and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. The Council has a policy which states if a property is empty for two years, the owner becomes liable for a 200% council tax premium. Mrs C’s property became vacant in October 2017 and therefore became liable for the premium in October 2019.
  2. In November 2019, Mrs C successfully applied for a scheme which supports owners of properties in a poor condition, to bring them up to a habitable standard, usually within 12 months.
  3. Mrs C says there were delays to her completing the works caused by the Council in the early ages of the scheme and due to the COVID-19 crisis from March. Mrs C says she should not be liable for the full 200% premium for the full period.
  4. We will not investigate Mrs C’s complaint. If she feels her property should not have a premium applied, she can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal about this where she can explain why she feels the premium should not apply.
  5. Mrs C could have also applied to the Council for a discretionary discount. The Council delayed informing her about this. However, I do not consider this caused her an injustice as Mrs C has not pursued this option despite being informed of her right to do so some months ago.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mrs’s complaint because she can complain to the Valuation Tribunal.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

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