on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.
Category : Benefits and tax > Council tax Decision : Upheld Decision date : 10 Mar 2026
The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s discretionary council tax application. This is because the Council has agreed to take appropriate action to remedy the injustice to Mr X.
The complaint
Mr X complained the Council failed to properly consider a section 13A(1)(c) discretionary council tax reduction under The Local Government Finance Act 1992, due to the Council’s handling of a liability decision for his home. The Council backdated Mr X’s liability for 10 years. Mr X asked the Council to reduce his council tax because he said it was the Council’s fault that it did not identify he was liable earlier.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended).
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) The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complained to the Council regarding the matters in paragraph 1.
The Council said it had waived four years of the council tax liability as it accepted it was aware of Mr X’s property earlier, and it took account of the statute of limitations. However, it said Mr X had not completed an online council tax discretionary reduction form, so it would not consider it.
If we were to investigate this complaint it is likely we would find fault causing the complainant injustice because the Council did not consider Mr X’s formal request for a discretionary council tax reduction made in December 2025.
The Council said Mr X did not complete its online form, so it would not consider his claim. However, the Council’s own Discretionary Council Tax Hardship Scheme and Discretionary Housing Payment policy do not state a form is required. As a result, the Council had not properly followed its policy. In addition, the Council did not request further information, make a decision or advise Mr X how to appeal. Mr X was not able to follow the independent appeal process because of this apparent fault.
Agreed action
At our invitation the Council agreed to remedy the potential injustice here by asking Mr X to provide the information it required and then making a decision depending on the response. The Council should explain its reasons and signpost Mr X to Valuation Tribunal if it decided to refuse his request.
The Council agreed to our recommendation, and it has now taken the action we proposed.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has taken appropriate action to remedy the potential injustice. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if he disagrees with the Council’s decision.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman