Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about liability for business rates. Mr X could reasonably argue his case in court if the Council takes court action for payment of the rates.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council is wrong about which business should pay business rates for a property. Mr X says this means his business is wrongly expected to pay significant bills.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We have the power to start or end an investigation into a complaint about actions the law allows us to investigate. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be raised in court. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X and the Council disagree about which of two companies should be liable for a property’s business rates. The two companies are separate. Mr X is a director of each company. Mr X says he has provided enough evidence to support his view about which company should pay the rates. The Council says the evidence is not persuasive.
6. If a business does not agree it is liable and does not pay, the Council can only enforce payment after getting a liability order from the magistrates’ court. The court can decide liability where this is disputed. Liability is not necessarily straightforward legally. It is more appropriate for the courts than the Ombudsman to decide liability.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because if Mr X, as a director, thinks the Council is wrong that the particular business is liable to pay, he can reasonably wait to see if Cl takes court action and, if it does, he can argue his case in court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman