Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of the council tax premium charge on his second home. This is mostly because the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him £100 in recognition of the injustice caused. Therefore, investigation by us would not be proportionate.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his request for an exemption from the council tax premium charge on his second home. He also complains the Council did not properly tell him about its decision to apply the premium charge. He says this caused him frustration and delay getting the exemption.

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. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X.
5. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. If we were to investigate this complaint, it is likely we would find the Council at fault because its communications with Mr X over three months about whether his home was exempt from the premium contained errors and inconsistencies. This included not properly considering information Mr X provided and not escalating concerns when Mr X asked. The Council ultimately agreed the property was exempt from the premium and sent a revised council tax bill excluding the premium. It is likely an investigation by us would find any fault on these points caused Mr X avoidable uncertainty, frustration and effort.
7. We therefore asked the Council to consider remedying the injustice by:
1. Apologising to Mr X for the errors and poor communication that led to avoidable uncertainty, frustration and effort;
2. Making him a symbolic payment of £100 in recognition of the injustice caused; and
3. Reminding staff of the importance of accurate, consistent and timely communication in these matters.
8. The Council has agreed to our suggested remedy. Therefore, we will not investigate this aspect of Mr X’s complaint because it would not be proportionate.

Notification of the premium charge

9. The Council Tax booklet the Council sent Mr X with his 2024/2025 Council tax bill mentioned the Council’s decision to start applying premium charges. Mr X says this was not enough notice of the charge.
10. The Government’s “Guidance on the implementation of the council tax premiums on long-term empty homes and second homes” (the Guidance) does not say Councils must tell individuals of its decisions to charge premiums. It only requires Councils to make a decision at least one year before the financial year to which it will apply. Councils have discretion to consider how to communicate this.
11. On the evidence I have seen, it appears the Council has followed the Guidance in deciding to apply a premium charge. Therefore, I am satisfied there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating this part of Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Agreed action

12. To its credit, the Council agreed to resolve one aspect of Mr X’s complaint and, to put things right, will complete:
• points a) and b) within one month of this decision; and
• point c) within two months of this decision.
13. Mr X’s complaint to us said he wanted us to give a decision on six separate points. I do not consider that necessary. We cannot always respond to complaints in the level of detail people might want. We have limited resources and must consider complaints in a proportionate manner, not necessarily providing a response to every individual issue raised in a complaint. My findings for this complaint are proportionate in the circumstances.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We have upheld this complaint because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mr X. We will not investigate the other aspect of Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman