Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a council tax reduction. This is because there was an appeal right Ms X could have used. The Council has invited Ms X to apply for a discretionary reduction. The Council has not yet had an opportunity to consider part of Ms X’s complaint.

The complaint

1. Ms X says the Council failed to award council tax reduction for periods from 2019-2020. She also says the Council’s council tax recovery using an attachment of earnings is causing her severe hardship.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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).
3. 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 or continue 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)).
4. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complained the Council should pay a council tax reduction for a period in 2019-2020. She said that she was on universal credit and was mentally unwell. She asked the Council to reconsider its decision
7. The Council replied that in 2021 it backdated Ms X’s claim for six months to April 2021, which was the maximum allowed. It gave Ms X details of her right of appeal. However, she did not make an appeal within one month, or within a maximum of 13 months in certain circumstances.
8. The Council confirmed it would not change its decision because Ms X’s request for a reconsideration was late. However, it said it could consider a discretionary reduction based on her circumstances. It sent Ms X a form and invited her to claim.
9. We consider it was reasonable to expect Ms X to have appealed as set out in paragraph 2. The Council cannot consider a late appeal now. But it has offered to consider a discretionary reduction. This is appropriate in the circumstances.
10. We cannot consider Ms X’s complaint regarding the hardship caused by the proposed attachment of earnings. Ms X has not yet raised this with the Council, and so it is premature. She may contact the Council about the impact this has on her and can pursue a complaint through the Council’s procedures.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it was reasonable to have expected her to appeal and part of her complaint is premature.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman