Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the council tax empty homes premium. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant wants.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council charged the council tax empty homes premium without any warning. He also complains of poor customer service. Mr X wants a refund.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The government introduced the empty homes premium which allows councils to charge extra council tax on properties that have been empty for two years. The Council introduced the charge in 2014. The Council provides information about the premium with the annual council tax bill.
5. The Council issued Mr X with a bill for the premium in December 2020. This was for an empty house he was renovating. Mr X complained. He said he had not been given any warning and thought the premium should not apply because he was renovating the property and had gone through some challenging life events. Mr X asked the Council to remove the charge.
6. In response the Council explained the premium forms part of the statutory council tax charge for the property and cannot be removed. It explained the background to the charge and that information is included with the annual bill.
7. Mr X has paid the charge but wants a refund. He says the Council should consider individual circumstances before deciding whether to charge the premium. He is unhappy with the way the Council treated him and says he had to chase the Council to reply.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The law allows councils to charge the premium and the Council introduced the charge in 2014. There is no provision in the regulations to only apply the charge after considering the individual circumstances of the tax payer. In addition, the Council provides information about the premium when it issues the annual bill.
9. Mr X complains about the way the Council responded. I have read the complaint correspondence and, while some of the Council’s responses could have been quicker, I have not seen anything which requires an investigation.
10. I also will not start an investigation because we could not achieve the outcome Mr X wants. This is because the premium forms part of the statutory council tax and we have no power to reduce someone’s council tax.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because we could not achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman