Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a request for council tax rebate. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision not to process the rebate to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council had not paid him a council tax rebate on his deceased father’s, Mr Y’s estate. He said the Council had initially told him it would. He is also unhappy about how the Council communicated with him about the rebate.
2. Mr X said the Council also did not respond to all his concerns about Mr Y’s property. He said he had asked it for advice about water damage. Mr X said he found the Council’s actions uncaring and distressing. He wants it to accept its mistakes, apologise and make the council tax rebate.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with the council tax rebate on his father’s estate. Mr Y died without a will. Therefore, the Council told Mr X it needed a Letter of Administration confirming he had legal authority to deal with Mr Y’s estate before it would pay him the rebate. There is not enough evidence in how the Council made that decision to justify our involvement.
7. We will also not investigate how the Council communicated with Mr X about the rebate. That is because it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints where we are not looking at the substantive matter. In addition, the Council has apologised for any delay in responding to Mr X. That apology remedies any injustice caused. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council did not provide support or advice on how to deal with water damage at Mr Y’s property. The property is privately owned by Mr Y. It is not the Council’s role to provide advice around damage to the property.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman