City of Wolverhampton Council (23 016 094)

Category : Benefits and tax > Council tax

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 12 Jun 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to pursue Ms X for payment of unpaid empty property premiums. This is because the complaint relates to events that took place more than 12 months ago; it would have been reasonable to bring the complaint to us sooner.

The complaint

  1. Ms X complained the Council has pursued her for payment of unpaid council tax empty property premiums and has failed to respond to her attempts to contact it about this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

  1. In 2023 Ms X complained about an outstanding empty property premium tax the Council has charged her for several years which has created a debt on her account.
  2. The Council advised it has been attempting to visit the property since 2020 to determine whether the premium should be waived after Ms X complained about the matter in 2019, but it had been unsuccessful. The Council went on to waive the premium from December 2019 onwards after Ms X showed she had sent evidence the property was furnished but would not agree to waive the outstanding balance. Ms X then brought the complaint to the Ombudsman.
  3. The Ombudsman will not usually exercise discretion to investigate complaints about matters that took place more than 12 months before the complainant refers to us unless there are good reasons for the delay. In this case, the evidence shows Ms X has been complaining about this matter for over four years; it would therefore have been reasonable for her to bring the complaint to us sooner.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because the complaint relates to events that took place more than 12 months ago; it would have been reasonable to bring the complaint to us sooner.

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