Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s business rates accounts. This is because it is unlikely investigation would achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X. The Council has already taken the accounts back to an earlier stage and apologised to Mr X and we cannot say it must agree to waive any further business rates it may decide are due at a later date.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to carry out actions it agreed as part of its stage one complaint response. He also complains about the Council’s handling of his stage two complaint. He says the Council wrongly held him liable for business rates on offices occupied by tenants, ignored information he provided and took him to court before it finished dealing with his complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained to the Council initially about the way it handled of his correspondence about his business rates account. The Council upheld Mr X’s complaint and Mr X was satisfied with its response.
8. However, Mr X later asked to take his complaint to stage two because the Council had not taken the actions agreed to resolve his concerns.
9. In its stage two response, the Council noted it had taken Mr X’s business rates accounts back to ‘an earlier stage as Mr X requested but Mr X still questions if the amounts the Council says he owes are correct. He wants the Council to confirm its bills are final and that it will not reopen the matter if it later discovers errors in its calculations.
10. But it is not for us to check whether the Council’s current calculations of the amounts owed are correct and we cannot say it must agree to waive any further amounts it decides may be due at a later stage.
11. The law on business rates liability is highly technical and the courts are best placed to decide liability. If Mr X believes he is not liable he may decline to pay and present his arguments in defence of any application by the Council to the courts.
12. The Council has taken suitable steps to address Mr X’s concerns that he did not receive documentation about his business rates account and we cannot investigate any complaint about the start of court action as set out at Paragraph 4. It is therefore unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for Mr X at this stage.
13. While I appreciate Mr X is unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely investigation would achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman