Summary: Ms C complained about the way the Council dealt with her council tax account and claim for council tax reduction and its failure to make reasonable adjustments for her disabilities. Ms C says she has suffered avoidable recovery action and been put to unnecessary time and trouble which has had a harmful impact on her health. We have found fault by the Council but consider the agreed action of a symbolic payment provides a suitable remedy in addition to the explanation and apology already provided by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms C, complains about the way the Council dealt with her council tax account and claim for council tax reduction since she bought her current property around September 2021. In particular, Ms C complains the Council delayed unreasonably in processing her claim for council tax reduction while pursuing recovery action against her and failed to respond to her contacts. Ms C also complains about the Council's failure to make adequate reasonable adjustments for her disabilities and medical conditions.
2. Ms C says because of the Council's fault, avoidable recovery action was taken against her and she has been put to unnecessary time and trouble which has had a harmful impact on her existing health issues.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. I have not investigated the following parts of Ms C’s complaint for the reasons explained below:

• whether Ms C’s property should be on the valuation list for council tax purposes as this is a matter for the Valuation Office Agency and Valuation Tribunal (please see paragraphs 6 and 7 below)
• any data breach matters as these would be for the Information Commissioner and also because Ms C has taken legal action against the Council (please see paragraphs 6, 8 and 9 below)
• disabled adaptations as this is the subject of a separate complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
6. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal 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 appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
7. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
8. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
9. The courts have said that where someone has used their right of appeal, reference or review or remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)
10. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I read the papers provided by Ms C and the notes of a telephone conversation with one of my colleagues. I have considered some information from the Council and provided a copy of this to Ms C. I have explained my draft decision to Ms C and the Council and considered the comments received before reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

12. The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 cover both the way councils collect payments of council tax and the way councils can recover council tax debt.
13. The council tax bill for the year is due on 1 April. A council will usually collect payment through monthly instalments. If any instalment is missed, the council will send the liable person a reminder. If a payment is still not made or a further payment missed, then the entire outstanding balance will be due (that is the full amount for the rest of the year).
14. To use the various powers available to it to recover unpaid council tax, a council must apply to the magistrates court for a liability order against those it believes are liable. Once a council has obtained a liability order it can take recovery action.
15. Council tax reduction (CTR, also known as council tax support) is a discount, not a benefit. Councils can award discretionary CTR to reduce a claimant’s council tax, using their powers under S13A(1)(c) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (as amended). Each council will have its own scheme. Somebody experiencing financial hardship because of a decision about wrongly paid council tax reduction, can apply for a discretionary reduction. Appeals about those decisions are to the Valuation Tribunal.

Key events

16. The Council sent Ms C a council tax bill on 25 November 2021 for the period 24 September 2021 to 31 March 2022 for the amount of £655.19. A discount of £16.47 was subsequently applied as the property was empty and unfurnished until 12 October.
17. Ms C contacted the Council at the end of December 2021 about Council Tax Reduction (CTR).
18. The Council sent Ms C a reminder notice on 10 January 2022 for council tax arrears for the above period. This set out that Ms C needed to pay £219.19 within seven days or she would lose the right to pay by instalments. This would result in the Council taking legal action for the total balance of £655.19 which would involve additional costs.
19. The Council sent Ms C a summons on 3 February which added £55 costs to her account. At the time there were special arrangements for those wishing to make representations due to COVID-19. People were asked to telephone the Council so it could arrange for an adjournment to the next remote hearing. Ms C emailed the Council to dispute the summons and wished to make representations. The Council did not respond to this contact and the hearing went ahead with the Council obtaining a liability order.
20. The Council sent Ms C a claim form by post in mid-February. The Council accepted in subsequent complaint correspondence that this was a Housing Benefit form and issued in error.
21. The Council emailed Ms C on 20 February providing a link to complete a CTR form online. Ms C provided this information in March. Ms C also completed a Disabled Band Relief (DBR) application form.
22. Ms C made a formal complaint to the Council in mid-March about the summons she had received and that her correspondence about this had not received a reply.
23. The Council replied to Ms C’s complaint in mid-March and accepted there had been failings in the way it had replied to correspondence and provided an apology. The Council also explained there was an online form available on its website to apply for council tax reduction and apologised she had not been advised of that option at the outset. The Council confirmed it offered different options for people to make contact including online, in person and by telephone. The Council noted it had sent Ms C a link to the application form on 20 February. The Council also confirmed it would need to visit the property to assess Ms C’s DBR application. The Council explained it was keen to work with Ms C to address the communication difficulties she had experienced and asked her to identify the most appropriate way for the Council to help. I have seen no evidence Ms C subsequently asked the Council to make specific reasonable adjustments in relation to its communication with her.
24. The Council visited Ms C in mid-March in relation to her DBR application. The Council awarded DBR from the date of Ms C’s occupation of the property.
25. The Council sent Ms C a further complaint response in mid-April. This dealt with the specific issues Ms C had raised about the summons she had received.
26. The Council sent a reminder notice on 24 June 2022 for council tax arrears for the period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023. This set out that Ms C needed to pay £135.33 within seven days or she would lose the right to pay by instalments. This would result in the Council taking legal action for the total balance of £1,101.33 which would involve additional costs. The Council sent Ms C a summons on 9 August.
27. Ms C wrote to the Council on 18 August as she was unhappy with its response to her complaint. Ms C considered the Council did not take reasonable steps to check if her account was subject to any discount and ignored her request to attend the court hearing to make representations. Ms C also considered the information sought for her CTR was excessive and the Council should have obtained this from the Department for Work and Pensions directly.
28. Ms C further wrote to the Council on 22 August to escalate her complaint to the second stage of its complaints procedure. This related to her liability to pay council tax and that any liability would have been reduced if the Council had checked to see if any reductions or discounts applied and this should have been done before issuing a summons. Ms C also complained the Council continued with the court hearing despite her contact to say she wished to attend.
29. The Council sent Ms C a second reminder notice on 21 September. This set out that Ms C needed to pay £399.33 within seven days or she would lose the right to pay by instalments. This would result in the Council taking legal action for the total outstanding balance of £951.33 which would involve additional costs.
30. The Council emailed Ms C at the end of September. This explained that due to the delay in responding to Ms C and assessing her application for CTR it was considered the matter should not have escalated to the recovery stage and confirmed the summons and liability order had been withdrawn. The Council confirmed it had awarded full CTR from 13 October 2021 to 20 February 2022 in the amount of £378.44 which reduced the balance of the previous year’s arrears to £162.06. The Council explained that if Ms C considered she was entitled to further assistance after 20 February she could ask for the relevant form to be sent to apply. The Council apologised that it had overlooked Ms C’s intention to claim and for any distress this has caused. The Council explained it would issue a new bill and placed the account on hold for 10-14 days and invited Ms C to contact it if she needed longer to settle the instalments. The Council explained Ms C would need to apply to the Valuation Office Agency if she considered the property should not be included on the Valuation List.
31. The Council provided a response to Ms C’s complaint at the second stage of its complaints procedure in mid-November. This dealt with various issues raised by Ms C and for the purposes of this statement I will only address those matters within the scope of the complaint I am investigating. The Council explained the arrangements for court hearings during COVID-19 was for anyone wishing to put their case to the court to telephone the Council so that the matter could be adjourned to the next available remote hearing. The Council explained it asked for contact by telephone due to the short timescale between issuing a summons and the court date. However, the Council accepted that it should offer an alternative method to make contact and would review this. The Council also confirmed that it would review cases in future to ensure there was no outstanding correspondence before issuing a summons. The Council explained the need for the CTR form to cover a wide variety of circumstances and that drop in or timed appointments were available for help. The Council also stated it could offer a home visit if there was no other way to meet a person’s reasonable adjustments. The Council was reviewing offering an email option in relation to its summons information. The Council noted it had wrongly sent Ms C a full Housing Benefit form and apologised. The Council accepted there were areas it could have handled Ms C's case better which may have prevented further stress and inconvenience and provided an apology.
32. Following the award of CTR the Council withdrew all recovery action and reset the account to bill stage to allow any arrears to be restructured.  The Council issued a new bill on 8 October.  The bill confirmed the amount of CTR and award of DBR.
33. The Council has confirmed that Ms C’s liability for the period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023 was originally £1,321.59 which was reduced by £378.44 after the application of CTR and reduced by £98.22 after the application of DBR. The Council also removed the legal costs of £55. The amount due as at 14 February 2023 was £1,113.39 (after the reduction of £150 Government Energy Rebate award and the addition of the outstanding balance from the previous council tax year of £693.72).

My consideration

34. The Council has accepted there were failings in the way it responded to Ms C’s correspondence and the potential impact on its recovery action. The Council has withdrawn the recovery action and associated notices and costs and provided an apology to Ms C. The Council has also explained the action it is taking to avoid similar issues in the future. The Ombudsman would welcome this action which goes some way to provide a suitable remedy.
35. However, I consider Ms C was put to avoidable distress and inconvenience as a result of the Council’s fault and this injustice requires a further remedy. I also consider there was unreasonable delay in the Council’s response to Ms C’s escalated complaint which resulted in her bringing the matter to the Ombudsman which I consider put her to time and trouble.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. The Council will pay Ms C £250 for the avoidable distress and inconvenience due to its recovery action and £100 for her time and trouble within one month of my final decision.
37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

38. I have completed my investigation as I have found fault by the Council but consider the agreed action above provides a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman