Summary: We shall not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s business rates. This is mainly because the Council has now agreed a suitable remedy for the injustice caused by its failure to consider its discretion on the business rates debt.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council is demanding he pay business rates that accrued from March 2020 onwards. He says this causes stress and financial difficulty.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. This complaint involves events that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Government introduced a range of new and frequently updated rules and guidance during this time. We can consider whether the council followed the relevant legislation, guidance and our published “Good Administrative Practice during the response to COVID-19”.
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal or a government minister or started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6), as amended) If someone appeals to the Secretary of State about a refusal of planning permission, the Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the Secretary of State.
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
7. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and considered his comments on it.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his planning application. He argues if the alleged faults with the planning application had not happened, he would have disposed of the property sooner so would have stopped being liable for the business rates sooner. Mr X used his right to appeal to the Secretary of State against the refusal of planning permission. So the restriction in paragraph 3 applies to this point and we cannot consider it. The fact the appeal might not have achieved everything Mr X wanted (for example, about his costs or rates liability) does not mean we can consider it.
9. The Council has discretion to reduce or completely remit a business rates debt if the Council is satisfied that the ratepayer would otherwise suffer hardship and that it is reasonable to reduce or remit the debt, having regard to the interests of the Council’s council taxpayers. (Local Government Finance Act 1988, section 49) The Council must consider this in each relevant case.
10. Mr X’s complaints to the Council said he would have difficulty paying the what the Council demanded. The Council’s stage 1 response said the Council was ‘unable to’ write off the business rates as the debt has been correctly incurred. Its stage 2 response said ‘…the Council has no discretion to ‘write off’ a tax correctly incurred…’ Those responses showed no consideration of the Council’s discretion as outlined in paragraph 9 above. That was fault.
11. Had the Council properly considered this, it might have decided to reduce the debt, completely waive the debt, or refuse to change the debt. We do not know what the decision would have been. So the Council’s fault leaves avoidable uncertainty about what might have resulted from proper consideration of the Council’s discretion. That uncertainty is an injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Agreed action

12. At my invitation, the Council has agreed to:
1. Consider all Mr X’s reasons (in the complaint correspondence and any other correspondence on the matter) and decide whether to use the Council’s discretion that I described in paragraph 9 above; and
2. Write to Mr X with the outcome within one month of the Ombudsman reaching a final decision on this complaint.
13. It is not for the Ombudsman to say what the Council’s decision should be. The Council’s fault deprived Mr X of the opportunity to have the Council consider its discretion in his case. The action the Council has agreed will put Mr X back in the position he would have been in but for the Council’s fault, as far as that is possible.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We shall not investigate this complaint. This is because we cannot investigate the planning application matters as Mr X used his appeal right and the Council’s agreed action is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused by its failure to consider its discretion regarding the business rates debt.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman