Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax payments because the Council has remedied the matter by providing an explanation. Any dispute about liability can be appealed to a Valuation Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mr X says that the Council said he owed Council tax on a property he says had been repossessed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review 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 use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
3. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X says that the Council says that he owes £757 for Council tax on a previous property but then said he owed £667.
9. Mr X says that the Council originally said he owned two properties between 2010 and 2011. He says that the properties had been repossessed so he had no liability. He says that, after the Council accepted this, they gave him a refund. However, they reduced the refund by £757 with, he says, no explanation.
10. The Council has provided a statement for the period April 2009 to March 2010 which shows summons costs and Liability Order costs minus his payments and empty property discount.
11. The Council says this left a debt of £757. The amount due for March 2010 was reduced by £89 leaving a debt of £667. This was because the original debt owed to the bailiff was £1,198, minus the refund of £531, leaving £667.
12. I am satisfied that the Council has remedied the complaint by providing a breakdown of the debt owed.
13. Any dispute about discounts or liability (and dates of liability) can be appealed to a Valuation Tribunal. The tribunal is an independent, expert body whose decisions are binding on the Council. I therefore consider that it would be reasonable to pursue an appeal in this case.
14. Any decision by the Council to waive recovery of a debt is a discretionary one and, in the absence of fault, the Ombudsman cannot question the merits of this.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman