Summary: The Council was at fault for delay deciding Ms X’s application for discretionary relief from council tax. The Council has already apologised and awarded full relief, which is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained that the Council failed to backdate an award of discretionary relief from council tax to June 2021, as it agreed to do following a previous complaint to the Ombudsman. She also complained that the Council wrongly changed the terms of its discretionary relief scheme.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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

4. I considered the complaint and the information Ms X provided.
5. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
6. I referred to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
7. Ms X and the organisation 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

Discretionary council tax relief

8. In exceptional circumstances, councils can effectively write off some or all of a council tax debt by using their discretionary powers under S13A(1)(c) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (as amended). In this decision I will refer to this as s13A relief.

What happened

9. Ms X has chronic and deteriorating health conditions which affect her daily life and ability to work.
10. In early 2022, the Ombudsman issued a final decision on a complaint from Ms X with reference 21006085. We found fault with the Council’s handling of Ms X’s request for s13A relief for the 2021/22 tax year.
11. The Council agreed to send Ms X a financial information form to complete. We said it should backdate any resulting award of relief to June 2021, when Ms X first applied.
12. In May 2022, Ms X submitted financial information in support of her application. In April 2023, Ms X wrote again to the Council. She pointed out that her 2021 application remained outstanding and provided updated information about her health.
13. The Council wrote to Ms X to say because she had no council tax arrears or debts, there was nothing to write off under s13A. Ms X complained to the Council.
14. In July 2023, the Council awarded s13A relief for the remainder of Ms X’s council tax bill for 2023/24. The letter made no mention of the 2021/22 application.
15. The Council wrote to Ms X in January 2024. It apologised that Ms X’s 2021 application “was not given due consideration”. It awarded relief for the 2021/22 tax year and so refunded the amount Ms X paid in full.

My findings

16. There was fault by the Council. It failed to make a decision on Ms X’s application for s13A relief from council tax for 2021/22 until 2024. It wrongly told Ms X that it could not grant relief unless she was in debt or arrears with council tax. This was inaccurate and was fault.
17. However, the Council has now decided the application, apologised, and awarded full relief. This is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.
18. There is no evidence the Council changed the terms of its scheme.

Back to top

Final decision

19. There was fault by the Council. The action the Council has already taken is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman