Summary: the complainant says the Council failed to properly consider her housing benefit and council tax reduction claims or provide a remedy it had agreed. The Council says it considered both the housing benefit and Council Tax Reduction claims properly and did not offer a remedy. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault for not considering the representations resulting in the complainant attending court causing avoidable distress and inconvenience.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I refer to as Ms X says when dealing with her housing benefit claim and council tax account the Council failed to:
• Properly calculate housing benefit leading it to place a stop on payment without proper explanation or consideration;
• Properly manage Ms X’s council tax account leading it to issue a summons for council tax she had already paid;
• Provide the remedy agreed by the Council when it upheld her complaint under its own complaints’ procedure.
2. Ms X says this led her to attend court when she did not need to and losing a day’s seasonal income. Ms X says the delay of her benefit and the lost income caused hardship. Ms X wants the Council to accept its error, backdate her housing benefit and complete the remedy agreed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
6. The Social Entitlement Chamber (also known as the Social Security Appeal Tribunal) is a tribunal that considers housing benefit appeals. (The Social Entitlement Chamber of the First Tier Tribunal)
7. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. In considering this complaint I have:
• Spoken with Ms X and read the information presented with her complaint;
• Put enquiries to the Council and reviewed its response;
• Researched the relevant law, guidance, and policy;
• Shared with Ms X and the Council my draft decision and reflected on any comments received before issuing this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The law and guidance

Housing benefit

9. A council may suspend payment of a housing benefit claim on being told of a change in circumstances affecting the claimant’s income.
10. There is no right of appeal against a decision to suspend benefit.

Council tax reduction

11. Councils may offer Council Tax Reduction to help council taxpayers with their council tax. There are over 300 different schemes with different rules on eligibility and the help that is available. Under those schemes most authorities have decided that all working age claimants must contribute to council tax.
12. Appeals against decisions about Council Tax Reduction are to the Valuation Tribunal. But before a claimant can appeal, they must ask the council to look at its decision again.

What happened

13. On 28 June 2018 Ms X applied for housing benefit and Council Tax reduction. Ms X wanted the claim backdated to 1 June 2018. In her application she explained she lived alone, had recently become self-employed and rented her home from her brother who lived elsewhere.

Housing benefit claim

14. The Council assessed Ms X’s income and awarded housing benefit. The Council reviewed the housing benefit claim in November 2018 when Ms X queried the award and it found it had not properly calculated Ms X’s income by deducting her expenses.
15. The Council suspended housing benefit in October 2019 when Ms X told the Council she had become a student. Usually students are not eligible for housing benefit and so the Council suspended the benefit payment on 1 October 2019 while it sought clarification from Ms X. When the Council received Ms X’s explanation that she had joined a part-time course the Council recognised she remained eligible for housing benefit. Therefore, on 30 October 2019 the Council reinstated payment, with an increased award. It made a four-week payment bringing Ms X up to date with her housing benefit. Any dispute about the amount paid and backdating payment can be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal.

Council Tax Reduction

16. Following Ms X’s application in June 2018, the Council asked for a copy of her tenancy agreement, her accounts and that she complete the Council’s self-employed information form.
17. In September 2018, the Council queried some of the information Ms X had provided. For example, it asked her to clarify when the tenancy began. Ms X had claimed June 2014, but in the letter from her brother it said Ms X moved into the property in June 2016. The Council still needed a copy of the tenancy agreement to check it met the rules on renting from a relative.
18. The Council also asked Ms X to provide medical information to help it decide the claim for council tax reduction.
19. In September 2018, the Council refused Ms X’s application for backdating council tax reduction. The Council told Ms X she must present medical evidence showing continuous good cause for not making her application on 1 June 2018. The Council said she must present this by 5 October 2018 if she wanted the Council to review this decision.
20. On 9 October 2018 with Ms X having missed the deadline for presenting medical evidence, the Council issued its decision to refuse to backdate the application to 1 June 2018. Ms X provided medical evidence on 12 October 2018.
21. In an email in October 2018 confirming receipt of the evidence the Council said:

“As you have provided the information after 5.10.2018 you now have to make an appeal against your backdate having been refused twice, once on 5.09.2018 and again on 10.10.2018…Unfortunately I am unable to deal with your appeal as this has to now go to our appeal team to consider…”

22. When the Council changed the housing benefit award in November 2018 it did not reassess Ms X’s eligibility for council tax reduction. Ms X says she asked the Council to explain why it had awarded housing benefit but not council tax reduction, but she says it failed to do so.
23. At the end of October 2018 Ms X asked the Council to reconsider its decision of 9 October 2018.
24. On 30 December 2018, the Council replied to Ms X’s emails. On review of the information presented the Council upheld its decision of 9 October 2018. It explained that with Ms X having missed the deadline for presenting medical evidence the Council had properly decided not to backdate the claim for council tax reduction. That meant all council tax remained payable.
25. The Council also addressed the evidence Ms X had presented. The Council said while it appreciated Ms X had been unwell, she continued to trade as a self -employed person. The Council said it did not consider the evidence showed her incapable of completing the application before 28 June 2018 or that her hospital appointments prevented an earlier application. The letter continued by saying even if the Council backdated the application Ms X would not be eligible for council tax reduction because her self-employed income was too high. The letter outlined Ms X’s right to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Council tax collection

26. Ms X is liable for council tax on her property and without any right to council tax reduction to help her pay the council tax, she remained liable to pay the full amount.
27. In April 2019, the Council received a claim from Ms X for council tax reduction for the new financial year. It assessed the claim. The Council decided the income Ms X received remained too high for her to claim council tax reduction.
28. The Council issued a court summons for underpaid council tax in June 2019. Ms X emailed the Council in June and twice in July 2019 to discuss the summons. The Council says due to a backlog in work staff could not contact Ms X before the summons hearing in court on 10 July 2019.
29. Ms X attended court having taken a day off from seasonal employment. At court she met with a Council officer. With no private rooms available in the court Ms X had to discuss her concerns with the officer in a public area. On hearing Ms X had written to the Council about the summons and not had a response, the Council’s officer withdrew the court summons and cancelled the court costs.
30. Ms X complained to the Council about the interview in a public place. The Council said in response it appreciated speaking to customers in a public place is not the most courteous or respectful way to address customers’ concerns. However, the Council said the court does not provide private rooms for its use and therefore this was outside its control. It refused to pay compensation because in its view it had correctly issued the summons due to non-payment of council tax. In responding to my enquiries, the Council shows Ms X paid council tax instalments after their due date. When it did not receive the instalment due on 1 June 2019 it followed that by issuing a summons on 19 June 2019. The Council says in its view withdrawing the summons and cancelling the associated costs is enough to remedy this part of the complaint.

Analysis has there been fault leading to injustice.

31. My role is to consider how the Council has dealt with concerns raised by the complainant about her housing benefit and council tax accounts. I cannot look at areas that are open to appeal before the tribunal services set up to deal with benefits. I must decide if there has been fault what impact that has had and what, if anything, the Council should do to correct a fault.

Housing benefit

32. The Council corrected its calculations on housing benefit when Ms X said it had not considered her expenses correctly. It followed the correct procedure in suspending housing benefit when Ms X’s circumstances changed on becoming a student. Within the month the Council had confirmed Ms X had enrolled on a part time course which did not affect Ms X’s eligibility. It restored housing benefit payments with payment of the amount due during the suspension. Therefore, I find the Council acted without fault in suspending and re-instating housing benefit. Any decision on backdating is a matter for an appeal.

Council tax reduction scheme

33. To qualify for council tax reduction Ms X must show her income falls within the range of income covered by the council tax reduction scheme. Eligibility for housing benefit does not automatically confer eligibility for the council tax reduction scheme. While this is understandably confusing this is not evidence of fault on the Council’s part. I find the Council acted without fault in considering Ms X for this scheme.

Council tax collection

34. On receiving the Council’s summons for non-payment of council tax Ms X tried several times to contact the Council without success. Had officers responded to her three emails ahead of the court date she may have avoided having to attend in person. On attending court, she had no option but to discuss her case in public in a corridor which the Council accepts is less than respectful or desirable. The Council withdrew the summons it says as a goodwill gesture. Ms X says the Council should refund her costs and the day’s pay she missed by attending court.
35. Ms X paid council tax in a series of late instalments, contrary to her duty to pay on the named date. When the Council did not receive a payment within two weeks of the instalment date in June 2019 the Council decided to issue the summons. In doing so I find it acted in line with usual practice and without fault.
36. Ms X attended court because she had no response to her emails. It is possible the Council may not have withdrawn the summons as a response to those emails, but it continued without having considered her representations. The Council knew it had a backlog. Therefore, before attending court Council officers should have checked the Council had not received any representations on the cases due to go before the court. I find the Council at fault in not carrying out checks and considering whether to seek a new court date while it considered representations. Ms X did all she could to raise concerns and avoid attending court. The failure to check receipt of representations and consider them before attending court led Ms X to attend court, miss a day’s pay and caused embarrassment and distress. In commenting on my draft decision Ms X says the Council also placed its staff in a difficult position having to discuss the issues in a public corridor.
37. In deciding on a suitable remedy, I have considered the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies. I have also considered the Council’s action in withdrawing the summons and cancelling the costs of the summons from Ms X’s account. In taking that action the Council has acted as we would recommend. However, the lack of discussion of the representations put to the Council in email due to staff shortages and a backlog caused avoidable distress. Ms X should not suffer an injustice because of a lack of staff or a backlog of work resulting in the stress of going to court and discussing her financial problems in a public area. Therefore, I have recommended a remedy to address the injustice not covered simply by cancelling the summons or the costs associated with it.

Recommended and agreed action

38. To address the injustice arising from the fault identified in this investigation I recommend, and the Council agrees to within four weeks of this final decision:
• Send an apology to Ms X;
• Pay to Ms X £150 in recognition of the distress caused to Ms X;
• Remind staff to check and consider any representations received before attending court.

Back to top

Final decision

39. In completing my investigation, I find the Council at fault causing an injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman