Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax administration as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council causing a significant injustice to Mrs X and any disputes about liability are best dealt with by an appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about various aspects of the Council’s administration of the council tax account on a property that was owned by her late husband. Mrs X complains that the Council:
1. failed to credit payments that had already been made on deleted accounts to new accounts and then requested payments for those amounts,
2. failed to apply discounts and exemptions to the accounts, and
3. went back on its agreement that council tax could be paid once the property was sold.
2. Mrs X also complains the Council failed to send bills and notices to the correct addresses and generated many unnecessary bills.
3. Mrs X says this caused stress and financial confusion.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. 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 any fault has not caused significant injustice to the person who complained (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
6. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mrs X has been the administrator of her late husband’s estate since October 2024. Included in the estate was a property owned by Mrs X’s late husband that he had inherited when his mother passed away. When Mrs X became the administrator, there were several council tax accounts linked to the property, some having outstanding arrears.
10. Mrs X has found it difficult to deal with this matter as bills and notices had been sent to various addresses and multiple bills had been generated over the years.
11. In its stage one complaint response to Mrs X, the Council gave a detailed account of its administration of the accounts, including how it had assigned liable parties and why it had sent bills where it had. In its review of the complaint, it acknowledged that on occasion its systems had not been updated with new instructions in time to prevent correspondence being sent to previously notified addresses.
12. While I recognise Mrs X may remain unhappy about this, as the Council has acknowledged some fault in this regard, I do not consider we could achieve anything further by investigating. While I accept this may have caused confusion, I do not consider this represents a level of injustice significant enough to justify our further involvement.
13. Mrs X complained that payments of £1323.05 and £1483.76 on accounts the Council deleted were not credited to new accounts it created to reflect up to date liability.
14. I asked the Council about this. It explained the former payment had been credited to the account of Mrs X’s late husband’s estate but that it had no record of the second payment having been made on any of the accounts. It said that if proof of payment is provided it can begin tracing procedures. Mrs X can therefore provide this proof and the Council will investigate. However, should Mrs X remain of the view that her council tax bills are incorrect due to missing payments, then she can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal (VT) about this. It is the independent body that determines disputes about liability, and it is reasonable therefore to expect Mrs X to appeal to it/have appealed to it.
15. Mrs X asked the Council if a discount ought to have been applied to the account of her late husband’s estate due to him having been of pensionable age before he passed away. I am not clear if the Council responded to this point but there is no specific council tax discount in law for pensioners. It would also have been for Mr X to have applied to the Council for any discount he thought he was entitled to and so any fault in respect of billing issues, could not be said to have caused any injustice in this regard.
16. Mrs X also questions whether the Council properly applied an exemption to the account following her husband’s death. In its stage one complaint response, the Council confirmed it had applied a Class F exemption until the property had been let to tenants the following year.
17. Any dispute about discount/exemption entitlements could have been challenged on appeal to the VT and this would have been the reasonable course of action. We are not empowered to make rulings on council tax liability/eligibility for discounts/exemptions.
18. Recent information provided to me by the Council indicates that it has agreed to freeze payment of council tax owed until the property is sold. As this aspect of the complaint has been resolved, we will not investigate, as there is insufficient remaining injustice caused to Mrs X to warrant our further involvement.
19. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

20. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is unlikely we will find fault causing Mrs X a significant injustice in respect of the Council’s administration of the accounts and any disputes regarding liability are best dealt with by the VT as there is an appeal procedure that Mrs X can/could have reasonably use(d).

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman