Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alleged failure by the Council to classify the complainant’s two properties as one dwelling for council tax purposes, or the valuation of these properties to inform the relevant banding. This is because the complainant could reasonably appeal to the Valuation Tribunal about these matters. All other issues raised by the complainant are either outside our legal jurisdiction, or should not be considered until the Council's complaints policy and procedure has been exhausted.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Miss F) complains about the Council’s decision to charge two separate council taxes for a property she considers should be classified as one. She also disagrees with the valuation of the properties for council tax purposes, as well as a decision to charge a council tax premium for one of these due it being empty and unoccupied. Miss F also says the Council has failed to consider her disability needs and make reasonable adjustments when communicating with her, including issuing a summons requiring she attends court for unpaid council tax. She says this meant she was unable to attend the scheduled hearing.
2. In addition, Miss F also complains about tenants placed into one of her properties by the Council under a social housing scheme. She says these tenants perpetrated anti-social behaviour and caused extensive damage to the property and that the Council ignored her prior warnings and failed to investigate. She also complains about a planning enforcement notice served on her by the Council, and its decision to initiate bankruptcy proceedings against her.
3. In summary, Miss F says the alleged fault concerning the classification and valuation of her properties has meant she is incurring significant costs and debts for council tax. She also says the Council’s decisions and failure to make reasonable adjustments has caused her significant mental distress, uncertainty and time and trouble. As a desired outcome, Miss F wants the issues raised in her complaint to be fully investigated and that all enforcement and other legal action against her be suspended pending the outcome of this. She also wants the Council to properly consider her health needs when making decisions and communicating with her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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). The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability, property valuations and council tax support or reduction.
5. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended).
6. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

Classification of properties and valuation

8. The Valuation Office Agency (VOA) is responsible for determining whether properties are classed as one or more dwellings for council tax purposes and for assigning council tax bands. The Council has no power or ability change how these have been classed, it is simply charging for council tax on the basis of the classification and banding set by the VOA. A person who wishes to challenge such matters should therefore raise these with the VOA and provide any supporting evidence. It will review the evidence and make a decision.
9. If the VOA maintains that Miss F’s properties are separate dwellings, she can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. I recognise that Miss F says she has contacted the Valuation Tribunal already and that it has informed her it cannot deal with these issues. I am satisfied that property classification and valuation are matters which carry a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal, though the person appealing should first seek to challenge such matters with the VOA in the first instance. As these decisions carry a right of appeal, and it is reasonable to expect Miss to exercise these given her past attempts, the restriction outlined at paragraph three (above) applies and we have no legal jurisdiction to investigate
10. With respect to Miss F’s complaint the Council is wrongly charging her a 200% empty property premium for council tax for one of her properties, this is a decision which also carries an appeal right to the Valuation Tribunal. If a person disagrees with a council’s decision to charge a premium, they can appeal by submitting this within two months of the council’s decision. Late appeals can be made to the Valuation Tribunal which will consider any reasons why the normal time limits should be extended. Again, it is reasonable to expect Miss F to exercise her appeal right and so we will not investigate this part of the complaint.

Failure to consider disability needs

11. Separately, Miss F complains she was prevented from attending a court hearing following a council tax summons being issued to her due the Council not considering her disability needs. When a summons is issued, this marks the commencement of legal proceedings and we have no legal jurisdiction to investigate matters subject to court action.
12. I recognise Miss F says her disability needs were not considered when the Council issued the summons and that this prevented her from attending the court hearing, but such matters could be raised with the court as part of those proceedings. If a person feels disability prevented them from being properly served with a legal summons or understanding its contents, this could be raised as a defence at the hearing. The evidence shows Miss F knew about the hearing prior to taking place and so could, in my view, have raised these matters then with the court. I do not consider the Council’s consideration of Miss F’s disability is separable from the legal proceedings. We therefore have no jurisdiction to investigate as the restriction I outline at paragraph five (above) applies.

Premature complaints

13. As set out at paragraph six (above) law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the Council knows about it and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. If we are not satisfied, we regard such complaints as being premature and refer the complainant to the Council so it can investigate and seek to resolve this in the first instance.
14. Part of Miss F’s complaint relates to Council tenants placed into one of her properties who she says perpetrated anti-social behaviour and caused extensive damage. Miss F says the Council ignored her prior warnings and failed to investigate the matters which could have prevented damage occurring. Though Miss F says she has raised this previously the Council has informed it has not been raised by Miss F in any of her complaints and therefore it has not the opportunity to provide a considered a response in the first instance. The Council’s position is supported by the evidence as none of the correspondence either it or Miss F has provided us makes any reference to this issue. On balance therefore, I am satisfied the Council has not had a reasonable opportunity to investigate this part of the complaint and so it is premature. We will not therefore consider such issues until Miss F either exhausts the Council’s complaints process, or provides us with evidence which undermines this assessment and shows it has had a reasonable opportunity to investigate and respond.
15. The complaint submitted to us also raises concerns about the Council issuing Miss F a planning enforcement notice and the way in which it has commenced bankruptcy proceedings against her. Miss F explains these decisions by the Council also failed to show due regard for her disability needs and its duty to make reasonable adjustments. I am satisfied for the reasons set out in the above paragraph that these matters are also premature. At this stage, we will not therefore consider these further.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the restrictions outlined at paragraphs four to six (above) apply.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman