Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his council tax account. That is because he appealed to the Valuation Tribunal, therefore the law says we cannot investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s other actions to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his council tax account. He says the Council removed his Single Person Discount (SPD) without notifying him, and then later failed to backdate the SPD to the date he moved into the property. He says the Council ran two council tax accounts in parallel which created confusion and prevented him from knowing about the errors.
2. Mr X says the matter has caused him significant stress, worry and financial hardship. He wants the Council to backdate the SPD to the date he moved into the property and refund all overpaid council tax. He also wants an apology for the Council’s mishandling of his council tax account.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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.
5. The Valuation Tribunal considers appeals about council tax discounts.
6. 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

9. In February 2025, Mr X notified the Council about his change in address for council tax purposes. He told the Council he moved into the property in February 2025 and that prior to this date the property was empty and unfurnished since April 2024.
10. In March 2025, the Council issued a bill which reflected the change in liability at the property and the unoccupied status of the property between April 2024 and February 2025. No discount was applied.
11. In August 2025, Mr X applied for a SPD from April 2024. The Council refused Mr X’s application because its records showed he did not move into the property until February 2025. The Council gave Mr X information about his appeal rights to the Valuation Tribunal.
12. In September 2025, Mr X complained to the Council. He explained he incorrectly stated the property was empty and unfurnished from April 2024. He said he was the sole resident at the property from April 2024 until April 2025, and asked for the SPD to be applied for that period.
13. In October 2025, the Council awarded a SPD from February 2025 until April 2025. As Mr X was dissatisfied with the discount period, he appealed to the Valuation Tribunal in November 2025. The Tribunal refused Mr X’s appeal because it was late without good reason.
14. As Mr X has appealed the Council’s SPD decision to the Tribunal, the law says we cannot investigate his complaint. This is the case even though his appeal did not remedy his complaint.
15. We will also not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council ran to council tax accounts in parallel. The Council has advised there were not two parallel accounts open for Mr X at a single point. It said the liability was in the name of the previous owner until it received Mr X's change of address in February 2025, following which it issued a new bill with the amended liability. There is not enough evidence of fault on this point to justify us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint because he appealed to the Valuation Tribunal. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s other actions to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman