Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the date used by the Council to calculate Mrs X’s business rates liability. This is because the injustice Mrs X claims stems from the Valuation Office Agency’s decision rather than any action by the Council. If Mrs X disagrees with this decision she may appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council charged her for business rates following the extension of her business premises. She says the Council wrongly confirmed building work was complete when it was not, issued her retrospective bills and gave her a short deadline for payment. Mrs X disputes the dates used to calculate her liability and the amount owed.
2. Mrs X says the Council have forced her to face bankruptcy. She wants an apology and for the Council to take accountability.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 another body better placed to consider the complaint.
   (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Valuation Office Agency (VOA) updated the rateable value for Mrs X’s business premises following information from the Council of changes to the premises. Mrs X is unhappy with the changes and says the Council’s completion certificate for building work gave the wrong date. She says part of the premises were not usable at the time and claims the completion notice is unlawful.
7. While the VOA considered the information provided by the Council it was the VOA, not the Council, which made the decision to update the entry on the ratings list.
8. As such, Mrs X’s remedy for the issue lies in a challenge to the VOA’s decision which is not a matter for the Council or us.
9. The Council acted on the VOA’s decision to fulfil its duty as the billing authority and it is unlikely we could say it was at fault for doing so. It offered Mrs X the opportunity to discuss a payment plan while she challenged the VOA’s decision and this is a suitable course of action.
10. Mrs X has further challenged the business rates decision with the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) and this is ongoing. The next stage would be to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.
11. We could not achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mrs X as we cannot overturn the VOA’s decision or alter the entry on the ratings list.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the substantive issue concerns the VOA’s decision to amend the rateable value and we cannot alter or overturn this decision. The Valuation Tribunal is the relevant body to deal with such disputes and until it or the VOA itself changes the decision the Council is entitled to take action to recover the business rates owed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman