Summary: The complaint is about the Council taking years to correct a council tax reduction claim, which resulted in an overpayment of council tax. This was despite the complainant having reported all changes of circumstances to the Department of Work and Pensions, which is what he had always done in the past. We do not uphold the complaint. The Council advised the complainant he needed to tell it separately of any change of circumstances. And an annual review letter had enough information in it to alert the complainant that there was an omission in its calculation.

The complaint

1. Mr D complains:
1. the Council took years to correct his and his wife’s (Mrs D) council tax bill after errors in calculating their council tax reduction (CTR);
2. this correction means they now have backdated arrears that they cannot afford to pay;
3. the Council now says Mr D should have reported his family’s changes of circumstances. But:
1. the only thing that changed was his month by month change in income, as he is self-employed. He reported this to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), as he had always done. He worked on the basis it would pass the information onto the Council;
2. the Council should have checked his income with him if it had concerns;
3. the annual council tax bills did not advise him to report changes. They referred to the Council’s website. But Mr D says he does not use the internet.

Mr and Mrs D wanted the Council to reduce or cancel their council tax arrears.

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. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax reduction.
5. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have not investigated whether the Council’s council tax reduction calculations were correct. Mr D has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal about these issues. So the restriction described in paragraph 3 applies.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Mr D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Mr D and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

Council tax

9. Council tax is a tax made on domestic properties. Councils issue one bill to each household. Residents of dwellings, including tenants, are usually liable for council tax from the date they moved into the property.

Council tax reduction

10. Council tax reduction is a discount, not a benefit. It reduces the amount of council tax a person has to pay. If a council gives someone too much CTR it can reduce the CTR and increase how much council tax the person owes. We call these changes “CTR reversals”.

Universal credit

11. Universal credit is a payment to help with living costs. The DWP, which is not part of the Council, manages universal credit.
12. The Council has a data sharing agreement with the DWP, where the DWP shares information with the Council to help it with its CTR assessments.

What happened

13. The information below is a summary of relevant events, and does not include every everything that happened during this period.
14. Mr D is a self-employed worker and lives with Mrs D. Before 2023, he was the only one working in the household. Mr D had been receiving a top up of universal credit from the DWP. Mrs D was the named person on the family’s CTR claim from the Council. But both of those claims were based on the circumstances of the whole household.
15. In the autumn of 2023 Mrs D began work. Mr D says they always declared her income to universal credit.
16. In early March 2024, towards the end of the tax year, the Council wrote to Mrs D with a letter advising it had carried out its annual review on her CTR claim. The letter:
• advised Mrs D she needed to report any change of circumstances;
• set out the Council’s calculation of how it had worked out the family’s CTR entitlement. The section showing income only listed Mr D’s wages, together with various welfare benefits the family received.
17. In mid-April the Council says it became aware there was an issue with the information the DWP was sharing with it about Mrs D’s CTR claim. That was because Mr D (the main universal credit claimant) was the only person on that claim with an “interest” flagged for CTR. That meant the DWP was not sharing with it information about Mrs D’s changes of circumstances.
18. The Council contacted the DWP who confirmed it had not correctly set the “interests” on the claim. It gave the Council new information (which was about Mrs D’s income since starting work and Mr D’s wages increasing). These changes negatively impacted on the family’s CTR claim, leading to arrears of CTR.
19. In mid-May the Council wrote to Mrs D to advise the family no longer qualified for CTR, from the date she started work. That meant it had wrongly paid her CTR. So her council tax account was in arrears.
20. The Council did further calculations which increased the arrears. It wrote to Mrs D with a decision on this at the end of June.
21. Mr and Mrs D asked the Council to review its decision. The Council’s review decision noted it had issued the family letters stating what income it was using to assess their CTR claim. It noted its letters clearly stated claimants should notify the Council of any changes in circumstances. And changes in income and employment status were both examples of changes they should reasonably have told the Council about.
22. Mr and Mrs D appealed to the Valuation Tribunal. The Tribunal did not uphold the decision, as it had not identified any error in the Council’s CTR calculation. It noted it could not consider if the delay was the result of error by the Council. So it dismissed Mr and Mrs D’s appeal.
23. Mr and Mrs D complained to the Council and then to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

Mr and Mrs D’s complaint

24. We look at a council’s actions and decision and compare them to the law, their own policies and our own principles of good administrative practice. However, we do not uphold complaints simply because someone feels a council should have done something different. And we are not an appeal body.
25. In Mr and Mrs D’s case I can understand their strong feeling of injustice, as they reported their changes of circumstances to the DWP and believed that organisation would pass the information to the Council. However, the Council’s view is they should also have reported changes to it.
26. The key issue for me to resolve has been whether the Council did tell Mr and Mrs D to report changes of circumstances – they say it did not. In response to my enquiries, the Council sent me a letter (see paragraph 16), part of a routine annual review of the claim. In it the Council does tell Mrs D to report changes of circumstances. Furthermore, the calculation in the letter only shows Mr D’s income. By then Mrs D was working so that calculation was incorrect.
27. So, while the evidence shows Mr and Mrs D did report changes to the DWP, they should also have reported changes to the Council. The Council’s letter tells them to do so. And the calculation in that letter sets out details of the family’s income which was by then was incorrect, showing it did not have the most up to date information. It is reasonable for the Council to have expected them to tell them about the incomplete information it had.
28. So my decision is there was no fault in the Council making the change in Mr and Mrs D’s CTR claim that led to the council tax arrears.

Back to top

Decision

29. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman