The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council discouraging Ms X from claiming council tax support and of poor administration of the council tax support process. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation. In addition, any injustice caused by potential fault is not significant enough to justify our involvement
The complaint
Ms X complains the Council discouraged her from claiming council tax support because of misleading and incomplete information on its website. She also complains about poor administration of the council tax support process. She says as a result, she has suffered a financial loss.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X considers she was eligible for council tax support (CTS) from January 2021. However, she said the information available on the Council’s website discouraged her from applying for CTS at the time. She said this was because the information did not include details about capital disregards.
The Council’s website contained a link to its full policy on CTS. This information was available to Ms X to review before deciding whether to apply for CTS. Further, the Council’s website encouraged readers to contact the Council if they needed advice or were unsure if they were eligible for CTS.
Therefore, an investigation is not justified as we are unlikely to find fault with the Council. This is because there was full information available on its website to allow Ms X to make an informed decision about whether to apply for CTS.
With regards to Ms X’s complaint about poor administration of the CTS process, she says the Council did not explain its decision in writing properly, so she was unable to check if she was receiving the correct amount of CTS.
The Council provided a full breakdown of how it calculated its CTS awards in April 2022. This provided Ms X with clear information about how much CTS she would receive and how the Council had calculated the figure. The letter also contained information about how Ms X could challenge the decision if she disagreed.
Therefore, an investigation is not justified as we are unlikely to find fault as the Council has provided detailed information about how it calculated Ms X’s CTS award.
Finally, Ms X complains the Council has made her out to be a liar as she says the Council has accused her of not informing it about a change of circumstances. She says she did tell the Council about her partner moving in with her from December 2021.
An investigation is not justified on this point. This is because, while I acknowledge the Council’s comments will have caused Ms X some distress, this is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation. In addition, any injustice caused by potential fault is not significant enough to justify an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman