Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about access to information and council tax liability. This is because there is another body better placed to deal with the complaint and Mr Y has a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal which it is reasonable for him to use.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains the Council has failed to properly respond to a Subject Access Request (SAR). Mr Y says he now has a liability order against him for unpaid council tax because of the Council failing to provide him with the information.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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) 24A(6))
3. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
4. 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section
5. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr Y made a SAR to the Council in July. The Council responded in August. Mr Y was unhappy with the response and complained to the Council in September.
8. Mr Y also says he is now subject to a liability order which he would have been able to argue against if the Council had provided the information he had requested. As a result, he has now been ordered to pay over £1,500 by the court.
9. The information Commissioner’s Officer (ICO) was set up to deal with complaints about freedom for information, including where someone is unhappy with the response given to a SAR. It is therefore better placed to consider this complaint than us so we will not investigate this complaint.
10. If Mr Y wishes to dispute his liability for council tax, he has the right to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal who can decide liability. As this is often a free service, it is reasonable for Mr Y to appeal to the tribunal on this matter and we will not investigate his complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is another body better placed to deal with the complaint to consider the issues around the request for information and it is reasonable for Mr Y to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if he wishes to dispute his council tax liability.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman