Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s pursuit of unpaid business rates between 2016 and 2017. This is because the complaint is late and it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains about the Council’s pursuit of unpaid business rates between 2016 and 2017. She says she has suffered grief, ill-health and financial loss as a result of the Council’s actions.

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 provide a free service, but must use public money carefully.
3. 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)
4. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions a council has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
5. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I reviewed Mrs X’s complaint and the Council’s response. I shared my draft decision with Mrs X and invited her comments.

Back to top

What I found

7. Business rates is a local tax on business premises. The Valuation Office Agency keeps the business rating list and decides if a property should be rated, the rateable value and the date each property enters and leaves the list. The Council then collects business rates based on a standard calculation based on the rateable value of the premises.
8. Mrs X owned a business premises but says it was empty between 2012 and 2015 as it was under development. The Council billed Mrs X for business rates covering the period, which totalled £4,922.36, and when she did not pay it obtained a liability order from the court and instructed enforcement agents (bailiffs) to recover payment from her. Mrs X paid the bailiffs £5,489.26 in 2017 to avoid further escalation and to stop them from taking her belongings. She then complained to the Council and appealed to the Valuation Tribunal in 2017 and 2018. The Valuation Tribunal reduced the rateable value of the premises to £0 but it could not backdate its decision to cover the full period. The Council therefore issued a partial refund/credit note to comply with its decision.
9. Mrs X complained again to the Council in 2019 and the Council reconsidered the matter. It decided to apply the £0 rateable value for the full period between 2012 and 2015, despite not being required to do so, and agreed to refund Mrs X a further £3,696.59. It later also agreed to refund its bailiff fees and summons costs. But Mrs X remains unhappy the Council have not refunded the full amount she paid and believes it should pay her £20,000 in compensation.
10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. Mrs X’s concerns relate to the Council’s business rates charges between 2012 and 2017. She was aware of the charges in 2017 but did not bring her complaint to us until January 2020. It is therefore late.
11. The Valuation Tribunal could not backdate its decision to cover the full period complained about but the Council has now applied its rationale on a discretionary basis. This puts Mrs X in the position she would have been had the Valuation Tribunal considered the full period; she has paid for the period 4 December 2015 to 31 March 2017 based on the rateable value of the premises as determined by the Valuation Office Agency and confirmed at appeal by the Valuation Tribunal. There is no requirement for the Council to waive these charges and the Ombudsman would not recommend the Council pays compensation as there is no evidence of fault in the way it has dealt with the case.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint is late and it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman