London Borough of Newham

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax and council tax reduction. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigation. The Council has taken suitable action regarding its communication. Mr X can appeal to the tribunal regarding his council tax reduction claim.

The complaint

Mr X says the Council has ignored his vulnerability and failed to accept offers he to make affordable payments for council tax he made for a year. The Council issued a summons when he was disputing the council tax. He also complains the Council has not properly assessed his council tax reduction based on his low income.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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.

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).

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 not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

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 replied that there were two council tax accounts following a change in Mr X’s circumstances in late 2024. It said it had followed the correct procedures regarding its council tax recovery action. It set up an instalment plan both accounts, but could not link the accounts. It said it had checked and confirmed Mr X was not entitled to council tax reduction. However, it noted that there were delays in responding to his queries and it missed calling him back. The Council withdrew the summons on the earlier joint account as a goodwill gesture.

We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. The Council was not required to accept Mr X’s payment offers, but it did ultimately reduce the instalments.

The Council has taken suitable action to remedy potential injustice as it removed a summons cost due to its poor communications. We would likely not seek a further remedy.

We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint regarding his council tax reduction claim because it is reasonable to expect him to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. This is the appropriate body to consider disputes about council tax reduction claims.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation. Mr X can appeal the Council’s council tax reduction decisions to the Valuation Tribunal.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman