Summary: Miss C complained about the actions of the Council in dealing with her council tax accounts while she was waiting for her house to be completed. She says the Council ignored her evidence that she moved into the property in April 2022, not April 2021, wrongly taken money from her bank account and continued to recover the money without justification. We found the Council should have sent her a formal decision, with reasons and a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. The Council has agreed to issue a decision now, hold off recovery until the appeal is decided and pay her £100.

The complaint

1. Miss C complained that Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (the Council) in respect of her council tax bills for her current address:
• failed to explain why it considers she has occupied the house since 18 April 2021;
• failed to explain why it has discounted her argument that she only occupied the house on 18 April 2022 as it was only habitable from this date;
• failed to provide her with a formal written decision explaining its reasons and giving her the right to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal;
• failed to refund £796 wrongly taken from her bank account in September 2022 and instead credited it to the disputed bill;
• continued to send reminders and summons for the disputed bill; and
• sent an inspector to the property, who turned up unannounced and was rude and unprofessional.
2. This has caused Miss C significant distress, inconvenience and time and trouble in pursuing the matter.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

3. I have not investigated when Miss C became liable for council tax on her address as that a matter for the Valuation Tribunal.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal about the same matter. 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)
5. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
6. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
7. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I have considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant, made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. Miss C and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Appeals against liability for council tax

9. If a person disagrees with a council’s decision that they are liable for council tax, they can appeal first to the council. If the council maintains its decision the person can then appeal to the Valuation Tribunal within two months of the decision notification.

What happened

10. While Miss C was waiting for her house to be built, she lived in a caravan on the site. She paid council tax on the caravan while she lived in it. In July 2021 the Council visited the site and noted there were no caravans on it. The Council believed the new house was occupied but has given no reasons why.
11. In May 2022 Miss C completed a property enquiry form saying she moved into the house on ‘18 April’ but did not specify the year. She says she meant 18 April 2022. In an accompanying email she said she had not received a completion certificate from the building control department but since the utilities were now connected, she had moved in .
12. The Council asked Miss C to say when the caravan was removed from the site and when she had moved into the house, so it could refer the case to the Valuation Office to amend the valuation list. Once this was done, any credit of the caravan account could be transferred to the house account.
13. Miss C said the caravan was removed in 2021 around April /May time and she stayed with family until April 2022, but she provided no evidence to support this or exact dates.
14. The new house was banded by the Valuation Office in July 2022, so the Council sent a bill for the house backdated to 18 April 2021 as this was the date it believed Miss C had occupied the property. The house was in Band F whereas the caravan was in Band A. As the caravan had not been removed from the valuation list Miss C was liable to pay the council tax on both accounts.
15. Miss C asked for confirmation that the caravan would be removed from April 2022 when she moved into the house and said she could not afford to pay two lots of council tax. The Council said the Valuation Office was responsible for removing the caravan from the list. The Council had referred the case to the Valuation Office, and it had 90 days to make a decision.
16. In September 2022 the Council said it would suppress recovery action on the caravan account until it was removed from the list. It transferred the balance from the caravan account to the house account and said it would send out an adjusted bill for payments of £15 a month from 15 September 2022. The Council said there was a balance to pay on the house account from April 2021
17. The Council then took almost £800 from Miss C’s account by direct debit on 15 September 2022. Miss C complained to the Council. She then received two reminders for outstanding bills of around £2000 and £440, followed by a summons.
18. The Council responded to her complaint on 3 October 2022. It said it had not cancelled the direct debit when it suppressed the recovery action on the caravan account and so had taken the balance on this account by direct debit. It apologised and cancelled the summons and costs. It said it could refund the money and confirmed it was holding action on both accounts until it received the Valuation Office decision. It said it had passed her query about the banding date (ie not moving into the house until April 2022) to the property inspector who had visited in July 2021.
19. Miss C acknowledged the actions taken and asked if the payment wrongly taken for her account would be credited to the new house account. She again said the house was not habitable until April 2022 when the drainage was connected. She said she was not happy with the involvement of the property inspector as she felt he had been rude and unprofessional when he visited.
20. On 19 October 2022 the Valuation Office confirmed it had removed the caravan from the list from 18 April 2021. The Council transferred the credit on that account to the house account along with the direct debit payment taken the previous month and issued a bill for the remaining £583.
21. Miss C sent three emails querying the bill and requested payments. The Council replied on 16 November 2022 explaining that there was a total balance of nearly £2500 outstanding on the house account from 18 April 2021 until 31 March 2023 and giving options for payment.
22. Miss C replied disputing that the money from 2021 was owed because she did not move into the house until April 2022. The Council advised her to contact the Valuation Office to request the banding dates were changed and offered to hold recovery on the account prior to April 2022 until she had done so.
23. Miss C replied saying it was the Council’s error and so she would not contact the Valuation Office, but the Council should do so. She asked for confirmation of the balance from 18 April 2022. She sent another email on 11 December 2022. The Council responded on 25 January 2023 clarifying the situation with both accounts.
24. Miss C replied the same day saying that it was the Council who said she moved into the house on 18 April 2021. She had consistently stated she moved into the house on 18 April 2022.
25. She received a summons for the outstanding balance and complained again. She sent two further emails in March 2023. The Council replied on 16 March 2023. It acknowledged Miss C had made payments which reduced the balance but not cleared it. It removed the summons and costs. It also said it was relying on the visit by the property inspector in July 2021 who said there was no sign of a caravan on the site, but the house appeared occupied. The Council pointed out Miss C had not put a year on the date on the property enquiry form and had not provided evidence of where she had been living between April 2021 and April 2022. The Council asked her to provide evidence now in order to amend the date.
26. Miss C said the caravan was removed after the inspector’s visit and she had stayed with family until April 2022. She had no proof as she had used the house as a correspondence address. She said the building control department should have proof that the house was uninhabitable prior to April 2022.
27. Miss C complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

28. I cannot decide when Miss C became liable for council tax on the new house. She says she moved into the property on 18 April 2022. The Council has decided she moved in on 18 April 2021, based on an unclear date Miss C provided on the property enquiry form and an unevidenced visit by the Council’s property inspector in July 2021. Miss C said she lived with family once the caravan went but is unable to provide any evidence of this. She believes the building control team should have evidence that the drainage was only connected in April 2022. This is a matter for the Valuation Tribunal to decide as it is the independent expert body set up specifically for this purpose.
29. However, I consider the Council should have sent Miss C a formal decision around September/October 2022 in response to her repeated view that she moved into the property on 18 April 2022. The Council should have provided its reasons and evidence for reaching that decision and given her details of her formal right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal within two months. The failure to do so was fault.
30. I note that the Council did refer to the Valuation Tribunal in its emails in November 2022, but it did not properly explain the reasons for its decision or explain that appealing was the correct way to challenge the decision. This information is not available on the back of the council tax bills.
31. I further note that the Council has removed the summons costs on several occasions due to delays in responding to Miss C and held off further recovery action. This has reduced the adverse impact on Miss C. However, the failure to inform Miss C of her formal right of appeal has delayed proper resolution of the central issue of liability for over six months and caused Miss C frustration and distress.
32. The Council apologised for incorrectly taking the direct debit from Miss C’s account. It offered to refund it to her bank account, but she requested it be credited to the house account. While taking the payment was fault, the Council has resolved the matter by apologising and putting the money towards the outstanding balance on the other account.

Back to top

Agreed action

33. In recognition of the injustice caused to Miss C, I recommended the Council within one month of the date of my final decision:
• sends Miss C a formal decision outlining the reasons for its decision and her right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal within two months;
• holds recovery of any outstanding arrears for the period between April 2021 and April 2022, until the appeal is decided or the two month appeal deadline expires;
• pays her £100 for the injustice she has been caused; and
• reminds all staff dealing with council tax accounts of the need to send a formal decision with a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal when liability is disputed.
34. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I consider this is a proportionate way of putting right the injustice caused to Miss C and I have completed my investigation on this basis.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman