Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s council tax support. The complaint about the Council’s request for information is late. Ms X could have appealed to the Information Commissioner about delays in responding to her request for information.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council’s handling of her council tax reduction claim and her request for information was poor. The Council asked for information it did not need and there were delays providing a response to her Subject Access Request.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended).
3. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
4. 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 the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

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 to the Council regarding the matters in paragraph 1.
7. The Council apologised that it had asked for incorrect information regarding Ms X’s second property before it decided in August 2024 that she was not entitled to a council tax reduction.
8. The Council also apologised for its delay in providing records that Ms X asked for in October 2024 about visits to the Council’s offices. She had said she advised the Council years earlier about the second property. The Council confirmed it did not have records of her notifying it about the property.
9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council asking for information it did not need. This complaint is late because it relates to requests the Council made before August 2024. Ms X made her complaint to the Ombudsman in October 2025. There are no good reasons for the complaint being late.
10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s delays in responding to her requests for information. Ms X could have appealed to the Information Commissioner regarding the delay. In addition, the injustice from the Council’s fault is not significant enough to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because part of it is late and there are no good reasons for this. It was reasonable to expect Ms X to refer to the Information Commissioner’s Office about the Council’s delays in providing information.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman