Monday 19 October: Complaint form offline

The supplier of our case management system has confirmed that they are experiencing a significant technical issue.

At present, we have no access to the case management system and we are currently unable to provide updates on existing cases.

We are planning on the basis that this could continue for a period of time including for the remainder of this week.

If you would like to check if your complaint is ready for the SPSO or enquire about making a new complaint, please complete our Complaint Checker.  

Please be assured we are doing all we can and will provide updates on our website. 

For an all service update: Service update | SPSO

Decision report 201100925

  • Case ref:
    201100925
  • Date:
    October 2012
  • Body:
    Aberdeenshire Council
  • Sector:
    Local Government
  • Outcome:
    Some upheld, action taken by body to remedy, recommendations
  • Subject:
    council tax (incl community charge)

Summary

Mr C and his wife live abroad but own a property in the council's area, which was leased to their student daughter. Mr C told the council about this and provided details of the letting agent. Some six weeks after the let began, he was told that the council had obtained a summary warrant in respect of arrears of current council tax, when this was not the case.

Mr C was unhappy about this and about information sought by the council in respect of his residence and a copy of the lease. He submitted six complaints to us, three of which we upheld: that there was an error in sending the letter relating to the summary warrant, a delay by the council in responding to the final stage of Mr C's complaint; and an inadequate level of detail in the council's final response as to how a particular allegation had been investigated. The council had already apologised in respect of two of the upheld complaints. We did not uphold Mr C's complaints about victimisation and information provided by the council.

Recommendations

We recommended that the council:

  • apologise for not having provided an adequate level of detail in how they had addressed the issue of alleged victimisation.

 

Updated: March 13, 2018