Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
Valuation Tribunal has unlimited powers to overturn decisions on discretionary council tax payments
Does this decision mean that discretionary housing benefit refusals can now be appealed to the tribunals service ?
No
The right of appeal to the VT solely concerns Council Tax liability, recourse against DHP payments would still be via Judicial Review.
why does the argument that a VT has jurisdiction to decide on discretionary council tax decisions not also apply to HB decisions ?
I was just about to post a question relating to VT and backdated Council Tax Carers discount. Before I do that, the heading of this thread - is it based on a decision or what other info?
SC v East Riding of Yorkshire Council see the news section RN main site
why does the argument that a VT has jurisdiction to decide on discretionary council tax decisions not also apply to HB decisions ?
Because the right of appeal to the VT arises in the Local Govt Finance Act whic is restricted to Council Tax only. There is no right of appeal to any tribunal in the discretionary financial assistance regs.
here’s a link to the rightsnet news story -
and the valuation tribunal decision itself -
here’s also a link to previous thread on decision which does discuss relevance to HB -
thans DManville,I see now why its not so simple but hopefully the principle can some how be workde into the DHP system, maybe Jan Luba will apply his mind to that one
thans DManville,I see now why its not so simple but hopefully the principle can some how be workde into the DHP system, maybe Jan Luba will apply his mind to that one
The problem is that there has always been a right of appeal against Council Tax liability decisions to the VT; it was decided that the decision on discretionary relief is considered to be about liability rather than a benefit decision.
The decision in SC & CW does not discuss a right of appeal as that right is set in stone; that is not the case for DHP; there simply isn’t a right of appeal. Schedule 7 of the Child Support, Pensions and Social Securoty Act prescribes the appeal mechanism for HB or CTB but does not include DHP; there is no prescribed mechanism for an appeal against a DHP determination.
many thanks DManville, what a shame that it seems a dead end for DHP cases, by the way can the LA appeal against the VT decision if the VT overturns the LA decision on a section13a case ?
There is an appeal to the High Court but, as VT decisions are not quotable, I doubt the East Riding will challenge this decision.
The bigger implication is that the President will change the guidance notes to VTs based upon the decision in this case which other Tribunals are likely to follow.
However, it looks like this decision caught the Council concerned “on the hop” a bit and no real arguments were put up to counter the argument that VTs can hear and decide upon discretionary reductions. (and there are strong arguments that it can’t)
The next case heard on this issue is more likely to be more closely contested.
Yes indeed, I had some corespondence with Jan Luba on this issue last year as all my cases had been thrown out by the VTs on grounds of no jurisdiction to deal with discretionary cases. Though Jan Luba’s outcome is a pleasant surprise and taking nothing from his success it does look like the VT Preident was having a bad hair day when he accepted the argument.
Yes indeed, I had some corespondence with Jan Luba on this issue last year as all my cases had been thrown out by the VTs on grounds of no jurisdiction to deal with discretionary cases. Though Jan Luba’s outcome is a pleasant surprise and taking nothing from his success it does look like the VT Preident was having a bad hair day when he accepted the argument.
Not necessarily, if you read the decision you’ll note that the decision, which is from the president, is “I made a practice direction that we only have very limited jurisdiction however I was wrong; this is how we’ll do it from now on…”
If you’re still in time for reinstating those appeals I’d be trying now if it were me.
as you say the next one will be more closely contested
Have there been any further decisions on this issue. Can we still use the East Riding case as an argument against refusal to allow an appeal by the local authority ?
Cheers in advance