Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to backdate a Disabled Banding Reduction on Mr X’s council tax. This is because there is no evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision.

The complaint

1. Mr X is eligible for a Disabled Banding Reduction on his council tax because his disabled child lives with him. He complained the Council would not backdate this discount. He felt that he had been treated maliciously by the Council, and said the experience had impacted his physical and mental health. He wanted the Council to backdate the discount.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)

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. If a property is occupied by someone defined as disabled (the Council Tax (Reductions for Disabilities) Regulations 1992 SI 554) and there have been adaptations to the property to assist them, they are charged as if they are in one band lower.
7. Mr X has been awarded a Disabled Banding Reduction because his disabled child lives with him. The Council has advised him that it cannot consider his informal request for this reduction to be backdated. Instead, he needs to complete the relevant application form, and provide evidence which shows his property was adapted to meet requirements for a disabled person who was living there during the period in question.
8. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the part of the Council, because it is entitled to ask for such an application and associated evidence before it can consider Mr X’s request. The Council’s website includes a link where Mr X can access the application form.
9. Our role is not to decide whether we agree or disagree with what an organisation did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
10. The Council has explained to Mr X it would need evidence to be able to consider his request to backdate the reduction, and has explained how he can apply for this. It has not received an application from Mr X or evidence there were adaptations in place during the period in question, and so there is no evidence of fault in its decision-making process. I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong.
11. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction. If Mr X were to make an application for the Disabled Banding Reduction to be backdated, and this were to be rejected by the Council, we would expect him to make an appeal to the tribunal in this case. This is because the tribunal is an independent expert body whose decisions are binding on the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault in how the Council took its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman