Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse the complainant’s application for a council tax exemption based on severe mental impairment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, disagrees with the Council’s decision not to award a council tax exemption based on Severe Mental Impairment (SMI). Mr X says the Council failed to respond and says he is owed £2800 in council tax because he is exempt. Mr X also wants compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. In January Mr X applied for a SMI. He supplied medical evidence from 2007 and gave consent for the Council to contact his GP.
5. The Council sent a form to the GP asking the doctor to confirm that Mr X has a SMI. The GP replied in February saying Mr X does not have a SMI. The Council told Mr X it could not award the exemption without current proof of a SMI. Mr X disputed the information provided by the GP.
6. The Council spoke to Mr X in February and explained what evidence he needs to supply to qualify for the exemption.
7. The Council wrote to Mr X in June. It explained it can only award the exemption if a doctor provides current evidence of a SMI and the date it began. The Council said the evidence from 2007 is too old to be accepted as proof. The Council said it would reconsider the application if Mr X provides evidence of a current SMI.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council correctly explained it can only award the exemption if Mr X provides evidence, from a doctor, that he has a SMI. Mr X has not provided this evidence so the Council cannot award the exemption. I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the information provided by his GP in February but this does not represent fault by the Council. Mr X would need to contact his doctor to discuss whether he has a SMI.
9. The Council has not failed to respond to Mr X. It spoke to him in February and sent a letter in June.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman