Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her Housing Benefit, Council Tax, Council Tax Support, and a Severe Mental Impairment (SMI) exemption. We have concluded our investigation and find fault in how the Council handled a housing benefit appeal and how it failed to issue proper appeal rights for Council Tax Support decisions. The Council has agreed to our recommendations, including a recommendation in relation to the SMI decision to ensure Mrs X has a clear opportunity to appeal.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council's handling of their Housing Benefit (HB), Council Tax (CT), and Council Tax Support (CTS). The issues include alleged delays and failures in processing appeals, incorrect handling of Severe Mental Impairment (SMI) exemptions and discounts, and errors in CTS demands. Mrs X seek clarification, correction of errors, and appropriate remedies for any injustices suffered.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
4. 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)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I did not investigate the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s rent account, including any alleged arrears, or its response to reported disrepair and infestations in her home. These matters relate to the management of social housing and fall outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction under Schedule 5.5A of the Local Government Act 1974. They are issues the Housing Ombudsman may be able to consider.
7. I also did not revisit the content of any earlier complaints made before 2023, including reference to a 2019 Ombudsman decision. These cases are now closed and outside our scope for review. My investigation focuses on more recent concerns raised with the Council in 2023 and beyond.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mrs X and the Council were offered an opportunity to comment on my draft decision and I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation and guidance

Housing benefit

10. The Council manages and pays Housing Benefit which helps eligible people on low incomes pay their rent. Regulations set out the rules councils must follow for calculating and paying Housing Benefit. Usually, the Council pays the tenant housing benefit. The tenant is then responsible for paying the rent to their landlord.
11. The Council should decide if it will pay housing benefit within 14 days of the person providing all the information required to make their claim, or as soon as reasonably practicable after this. (The Housing Benefit Regulations 2006, section 89)
12. If someone disagrees with a housing benefit decision they can ask the council for a review. If they have a review, and are not happy with the decision, they can then appeal to the Social Entitlement Chamber of the First Tier Tribunal. The law says people should appeal within one month of the date of the decision they think is wrong. The tribunal can decide to accept a late appeal up to 13 months after the decision. Because the person can appeal, we would normally decide not to investigate complaints about these decisions.
13. Where a council receives an appeal, it can reconsider the decision before passing it to the Tribunal. If the decision remains unchanged, the council must pass the matter to the Tribunal “as soon as reasonably practicable”. (Rule 24(1A) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008

Council Tax Support (CTS)

14. Each local authority is responsible for setting its own Council Tax Support (CTS) scheme, which is subject to annual approval. These schemes determine who is eligible for CTS and how much support they receive. The rules vary between councils, but councils must publish their schemes and administer them fairly and consistently. (Local Government Finance Act 1992, as amended by the Local Government Finance Act 2012)
15. Decisions about CTS are appealable to the Valuation Tribunal. Councils should include appeal rights in their decision notices, and these should explain how to appeal and within what timescales. Where appeal rights are available, the Ombudsman would not normally investigate the merits of the decision, but may consider whether the Council properly considered the application and gave correct appeal information.

Council Tax – Severe Mental Impairment (SMI) Exemption

16. The Local Government Finance Act 1992 and associated regulations provide for discounts or exemptions from Council Tax in certain circumstances. A person may be entitled to a 100% exemption if they are severely mentally impaired (SMI) and live alone, or a 25–50% discount depending on who else lives in the property.
17. To qualify for an SMI discount or exemption, the applicant must:
• Be medically certified as having a severe mental impairment (typically confirmed by a GP), and
• Be entitled to certain qualifying benefits (such as ESA or Attendance Allowance).
18. Councils must consider all relevant information provided in support of an SMI application. If they refuse an exemption or discount, they must inform the applicant of their right to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Ombudsman Guidance and Good Administrative Practice

19. The Ombudsman expects councils to handle benefit and discount applications in a timely and accessible way, to give clear reasons for decisions, and to ensure that service users are informed of their rights, including rights of review and appeal.
20. Where a council fails to give correct or timely appeal rights, or causes avoidable confusion or delay, this may be fault. The Ombudsman may recommend a remedy to acknowledge the avoidable time, trouble or uncertainty caused.

Back to top

What happened

21. Mrs X receives Housing Benefit (HB), Council Tax Support (CTS), and a Severe Mental Impairment (SMI) discount on her Council Tax. She has long-standing health conditions and is supported by her adult son, who acts as her unpaid, live-in carer. Mrs X has raised a number of concerns about how the Council has handled these benefits and discounts over several years.
22. In August 2022, the Council issued a revised HB and CTS entitlement letter following a reassessment. Later in August 2022, Mrs X contacted the Council stating she wished to appeal the decision. The Council did not treat this correspondence as an appeal. Instead, it responded to her concerns through its complaint process. In January 2023, the Council issued a new HB and CTS decision following a further reassessment and provided updated appeal rights. It explained its position in writing in early February 2023.
23. In May, June, and July 2023, Mrs X submitted information to the Council to support an application for an SMI exemption, including the forms and her GP’s details. The Council disputes that these forms were satisfactorily completed. The Council says it received the completed form from her GP in August 2023. In September 2023, the Council retrospectively applied a 100% exemption from 2016 to 2021, and a 50% discount from July 2021 onwards. The Council explained this change was due to Mrs X’s son joining the household in July 2021. It said that because both individuals were ‘disregarded persons’ for Council Tax purposes, a 50% discount applied to the personal element of the charge. The remaining property element was covered by CTS and hardship fund top-ups, meaning Mrs X had no Council Tax to pay. Mrs X says she qualifies for an exemption from 2014 and disputes the current discount.
24. In early September 2023, the Council issued revised CTS decision letters covering the financial years from 2021 to 2024. Mrs X contacted the Council to dispute the decisions. The Council issued a review response in September 2023 and confirmed that she was entitled to the maximum level of CTS. In Mrs X’s case, it said this was fully offset by hardship fund payments, and she had no Council Tax to pay for the periods concerned.
25. Separately, Mrs X asked the Council to correspond with her via her Resolver email case file. It apologised and confirmed future correspondence would be sent by that route and in print.

Enquiries to Council

26. As part of this investigation, we raised enquiries with the Council. In response, the Council said:
• It had initially treated Mrs X’s August 2022 letter as a complaint rather than an appeal, but it later provided appeal rights when a revised HB decision was issued in January 2023.
• It awarded a 100% SMI exemption from 2016 to 2021 and a 50% discount from July 2021 onwards, based on the presence of a second disregarded adult in the property.
• Council Tax bills and reminders were issued to reflect changes in CTS and hardship payments, and were correct at the time of issue.
• Mrs X was awarded full CTS in all relevant years. While minor excess income was identified, this was covered by hardship payments.
• Appeal rights were provided in decision letters, but the Council said there was no practical basis for appeal as no residual liability remained.
• It acknowledged delay and oversight in responding in Mrs X’s preferred format, and confirmed steps had been taken to ensure future correspondence would follow her stated preferences.

Response to draft decision

27. In response to my draft decision, Mrs X and the Council provided detailed comments which have been carefully considered. I have amended parts of this decision to reflect the Council’s evidence about the SMI application process and its earlier explanations of benefit calculations. I have also clarified factual details raised by Mrs X.

Back to top

Analysis

Handling of Housing Benefit Appeal

28. Under Housing Benefit Regulations and Tribunal Procedure Rules, claimants have a right to appeal decisions within specified timescales. Councils may reconsider a decision but must forward an unresolved appeal to the Tribunal “as soon as reasonably practicable.”
29. In August 2022, the Council issued a revised housing benefit and council tax support decision. Mrs X wrote in August 2022 to say she wished to appeal. The Council treated this as a complaint rather than an appeal. It did not issue an appeal response or forward the matter to the Tribunal at that time.
30. In January 2023, the Council reassessed her housing benefit based on updated ESA figures. Later in January 2023, it issued a new decision with fresh appeal rights. In early February 2023, the Council wrote to explain the calculation and confirmed its view that the correct ESA figures had been used.
31. The Council’s failure to treat the August 2022 correspondence as an appeal was fault. Although it later issued a revised decision with fresh appeal rights in January 2023, that does not negate the failure to offer the proper appeal process at the time of the original request and here I have made a finding of fault. Mrs X lost the opportunity for timely independent review of her original claim and was instead diverted into the complaints process. That was likely frustrating and caused avoidable uncertainty.

Council Tax Support (CTS) appeal rights

32. Where a person disagrees with a CTS decision, they have a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. Councils should inform applicants of this right in their decision notices, and provide clear guidance on how to appeal.
33. In September 2023, the Council issued revised CTS decision letters covering the financial years from 2021 to 2024. Mrs X disputed the decisions, and the Council responded with a review letter in September 2023. It confirmed that she was entitled to the maximum level of CTS and explained that any minor excess income was offset by hardship payments. In response to our enquiries, the Council stated there were no grounds for appeal, and that because Mrs X had no residual Council Tax to pay, there was no practical basis for challenge. It said that appeal rights were included in the letters.
34. Mrs X was disputing the Council’s calculation of her income and felt the outcome was incorrect. While the Council considered there was nothing to appeal because the final balance was nil, that is not a valid reason to deny someone their right to appeal the underlying decision. The appeal right exists independently of the outcome, and a person is entitled to challenge the accuracy of an assessment even if the resulting liability is zero.
35. By not clearly explaining Mrs X’s right of appeal and instead concluding that no appeal could be made, the Council failed to properly advise her of her legal rights. That was fault. It likely caused avoidable confusion, undermined Mrs X’s ability to seek an independent review of the decision, and contributed to her ongoing dissatisfaction and lack of trust in the process.

Council Tax – Severe Mental Impairment (SMI)

36. If another adult lives in the property but is also disregarded then a 50% discount may apply. Applicants must provide medical certification and evidence of qualifying benefits. Councils are expected to consider all relevant information, communicate decisions clearly, and explain the applicant’s right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.
37. In this case, Mrs X believes she should have received an SMI exemption from 2014 onwards. The Council retrospectively awarded a 100% exemption from 2016 to 2021, and a 50% discount from July 2021. It explained that when her son joined the household in July 2021, both were disregarded persons for Council Tax purposes, and the property became eligible for a 50% discount rather than a full exemption. The Council said it received full medical confirmation from Mrs X’s GP in August 2023 and issued its exemption decision in early September 2023.
38. Mrs X contends that she provided all required information, including her GP’s details and completed forms, in May, June, and July 2023. She said she had to resubmit the same documents repeatedly before the Council acted. The Council says it did not receive a completed application form or sufficient contact details until September 2023. Its records show repeated requests for missing information during this period. On balance, this suggests there was a breakdown in communication, with each party maintaining that the other had not taken the necessary steps. As a result, the application was not resolved until September 2023.
39. Mrs X also disputes the level and period of the exemption granted. She believes she should have received a full exemption from 2014, not 2016. However, this is a matter relating to Council Tax liability and the extent of any exemption or discount awarded. These are decisions which fall under the jurisdiction of the Valuation Tribunal, not the Ombudsman.
40. The Council has said that Mrs X was advised she could appeal the SMI exemption and discount decision to the Valuation Tribunal, but that she indicated she was pursuing the matter through the Ombudsman instead. While the Council appears to have provided appropriate advice, the Ombudsman is not an appeal body and cannot decide whether the Council’s decision on liability was right or wrong. As such, this is not a matter for further investigation. However, to ensure Mrs X has a clear and current opportunity to challenge the decision through the proper route, the Council should reissue its decision and associated appeal rights in writing.

Council Tax Demands

41. The Council says all Council Tax bills and reminders were correct at the time they were issued, based on the prevailing CTS entitlement and hardship fund payments. It explained that adjustments to CTS often triggered automated billing, and hardship payments were amended accordingly. These fluctuations could result in updated demands being issued, even if no new liability ultimately arose.
42. There is no evidence that Mrs X was asked to pay money she did not owe, or that demands were issued in error in a way that affected her financial position. However, Mrs X expressed confusion and concern about the number and nature of the bills she received. She believed she was being charged incorrectly and submitted repeated complaints and evidence to challenge the Council’s figures.
43. The Council provided detailed breakdowns of Mrs X’s entitlement on several occasions, including in February 2022, February 2023, and September 2023. These set out how her Housing Benefit and Council Tax Support awards had been calculated. However, Mrs X continued to question how her liability had been assessed and submitted repeated complaints about the figures used. This suggests that although the Council issued detailed explanations, these did not resolve the ongoing disagreement.
44. While the bills themselves may have been accurate at the time of issue, the Council did not always present changes in a way that resolved Mrs X’s ongoing confusion.

Findings and overall impact

45. This investigation identified fault in the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s Housing Benefit appeal and in its administration of Council Tax and Council Tax Support decisions. The Council also acknowledged that it had not consistently communicated with Mrs X in her preferred format, which may have contributed to her confusion and frustration. While each issue in isolation may not have caused significant injustice, the cumulative effect of these faults created avoidable confusion, frustration, and distress for Mrs X.
46. Mrs X is a vulnerable resident who relies on a complex mix of benefits and support. The evidence shows she made persistent efforts to engage with the Council, submitting documents, raising concerns, and seeking explanations. However, her interactions were met with procedural delays, inconsistent communication, and unresolved clarity that she sought from the Council. These issues made it harder for her to understand and navigate decisions that directly affected her income and security. The Council’s actions, although not malicious, fell short of what we would expect in supporting a resident in her circumstances.
47. Although the Council has taken some steps to address her concerns, further action is warranted to acknowledge the impact of the faults identified and to help prevent similar issues arising in future.

Back to top

Agreed action

48. To remedy injustice in this complaint and prevent similar occurrences, the Council will:
1. Provide Mrs X with an apology for fault and injustice identified in this complaint. The apology should be in line with our published Guidance on Remedies.
2. Pay Mrs X £400 to acknowledge the frustration and time and trouble she experienced in trying to resolve her Housing Benefit appeal, exercise her appeal rights for Council Tax Support decisions, and receive communication in her preferred format.
3. Reissue Mrs X’s appeal rights in writing for the decision not to backdate the Severe Mental Impairment exemption further than 2016, and any remaining liability linked to Council Tax Support decisions, if applicable.
4. Review its procedures to ensure Housing Benefit appeal requests are properly identified and referred to the Tribunal where required.
5. Remind staff to clearly explain and issue appeal rights in all Council Tax Support and discount decisions, regardless of whether the Council considers there to be residual liability.
49. The Council will complete action points a-c within one month of the Ombudsman’s final decision and action points d-e within two months of the Ombudsman’s final decision. The Council will provide evidence it has complied with the above recommendations.

Back to top

Decision

50. Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her Housing Benefit, Council Tax, Council Tax Support, and a Severe Mental Impairment (SMI) exemption. We have concluded our investigation and find fault in how the Council handled a housing benefit appeal and how it failed to issue proper appeal rights for Council Tax Support decisions. The Council has agreed to our recommendations, including a recommendation in relation to the SMI decision to ensure Mrs X has a clear opportunity to appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman