London Borough of Merton (25 027 360)

Category : Planning > Other

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 19 Aug 2026

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision about a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). It would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal the decision to the Valuation Office Agency (VOA).

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains the Council calculated a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) wrongly. He says that he provided evidence the calculation was completed wrongly to the Council, and it has refused to recalculate it. He says that this has caused him stress and has left him with a larger charge than he should have.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X complained the Council wrongly calculated a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). When he provided evidence that it had been done incorrectly, he says the Council refused to recalculate it. If Mr X felt the CIL was calculated incorrectly, it would have been reasonable to expect him to appeal to the Valuation Office for Agency (VOA). The VOA can determine whether the CIL calculation has been done correctly or not. It also has the power to require the Council to correct any errors it identifies which we are unable to do. As this alternative remedy was available, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have used his right of appeal to the VOA.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings