Summary: Mr E complains the Council communicated poorly when collecting council tax from him, causing confusion and leading to it adding unnecessary costs to his bill. We do not uphold this complaint finding no or insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in its billing or recovery of council tax from Mr E.

The complaint

1. Mr E complains the Council communicated poorly during the 2018-19 financial year when collecting council tax from him. Mr E says he fell behind in paying his council tax as he waited for the Council to send him a correct bill. He also failed to receive a final notice telling him what debt he owed before the Council summonsed him to the magistrates’ court for non-payment. Mr E complained to the Council about these matters but it continued recovery of the debt through the Courts. He spent a morning at the court waiting for his case but had to leave for work before it was called.
2. Mr E says because of the Council’s actions he had unnecessary costs added to his council tax bill. He considers its actions also caused him distress and put him to unnecessary time and trouble.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated the Council’s billing of council tax to Mr E from March 2018 onward. I have also investigated its actions in recovering council tax up to the time it sought a liability order for non-payment via the magistrates’ court. However, for reasons explained at the end of this decision statement I cannot take a view on what happened at court on the day of the liability order hearing.

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 cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with a council’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

7. Before issuing this decision statement I considered:

• Mr E’s written complaint to the Ombudsman and any supporting information he provided.
• Correspondence sent to Mr E before he made his complaint to the Ombudsman giving its reply to his complaint.
• Information provided by the Council in reply to my written enquiries.
• Relevant law as referred to in the facts below.

8. I also sent both Mr E and the Council a draft decision statement setting out my thinking about the complaint and inviting any comments. I received no comments from either party.

Back to top

What I found

9. Mr E lives in the Council’s area with his wife, whom I will call ‘Mrs E’. At the beginning of events covered by this complaint, March 2018, both were full time students. Where only full-time students live in a property there is no council tax to pay on that property.
10. Mr E’s student certificate showed his study due to end on 20 March 2018. In March 2018, the Council therefore sent Mr E a council tax bill for the period 20 March to 31 March 2018. This bill was for 75% of the full council tax charged on Mr E’s home. Because Mrs E remained a full-time student the Council disregarded her occupation of the home for council tax purposes. The Council therefore billed Mr E as if he was a single person. Single people can receive a 25% discount on their council tax if they alone (a ‘single person discount’). This is not the same as a student disregard, but has the same effect.
11. Mr E queried his bill as he remained a student. On 9 April 2018, he provided the Council with a new student certificate showing his studies now expected to finish on 20 June 2018. At the same time, he provided a copy of Mrs E’s student certificate showing her studies expected to finish on 25 September 2018.
12. I have seen no evidence the Council adjusted Mr E’s council tax bill until mid-June 2018. However, nor have I seen any evidence the Council attempted recovery of any council tax from him. On 16 June 2018, the Council issued two new council tax bills to Mr E. One of those was an amended bill for the period 20 March to 31 March 2018. It confirmed Mr E had nothing to pay for this period. The other bill charged Mr E council tax for the period 27 June 2018 to 31 March 2019. It showed there was no charge for the time 1 April to 26 June 2018 because “all occupiers students”. It showed a 25% credit for the rest of the year with the comment “disregard (student)”. It asked Mr E to pay the bill in instalments, beginning with a first payment “on or before” 28 July 2018 and ending 28 January 2019.
13. Mr E did not pay anything towards this bill on or before 28 July. The Council records sending him a SMS text message on 2 August to say he had missed a payment. On 6 August 2018, the Council then sent Mr E a reminder notice. It said if he did not pay the missing instalment within seven days he would lose the right to pay in instalments. He would then receive a final bill and if he did not pay that in seven days it would start magistrates’ court proceedings. Mr E paid the missing instalment on 15 August 2018.
14. Mr E did not pay the second instalment due on or before 28 August 2018. On 5 September 2018, the Council sent him a further reminder notice. This was in the same terms as the first reminder notice. It again said that if he did not pay in seven days then the full outstanding balance would fall due. It also said if Mr E did not pay the Council would start magistrates’ court proceedings. Mr E paid the missing instalment on 13 September 2018.
15. Because Mr E did not pay that second missing instalment in seven days the Council sent him a final notice on 11 October 2018, demanding the full sum outstanding. Mr E did not receive this, although the Council received no return via the post office. Mr E did make a third payment on 13 October 2018.
16. On 5 November 2018 Mr E received a summons for the magistrates’ court for non-payment of the balance of his council tax bill. The summons added £53.50 costs to his bill. Before Mr E received this, he had made a fourth payment towards his council tax on 3 November 2018. In doing so he noted his account at ‘summons’ stage on the council website. He telephoned the Council at that point. The Council’s notes of that conversation say that it discussed with Mr E setting up a ‘special payment arrangement’ with him to clear the account. The notes say its officer advised unless he agreed this the full sum left owing on the 2018-19 account would remain subject to recovery action. Mr E said he had made a complaint about the Council’s actions. Its notes suggest he wanted a reply to that complaint before agreeing to a special payment arrangement.
17. The Council replied to Mr E’s complaint on 12 November 2018 where it defended the actions taken on his account, saying it had followed all proper procedure. Mr E remained unhappy with its actions and so escalated his complaint the same day. On 21 November, he made a fifth payment towards his council tax in line with the original instalment plan. But the Council continued with recovery.
18. Mr E’s case went to the magistrates’ court on 28 November 2018. Mr E attended in person and met with the officer appearing for the Council. Mr E wanted to appear in person at the court and waited until lunchtime for it to call his case, but it did not do so. Then he had to leave court and go to work. The magistrates’ court went on to issue a liability order requiring Mr E to pay the outstanding balance due on his council tax. This also added a further £19 cost.
19. On 5 December 2018, the Council notes suggest that it spotted Mrs E’s student disregard should have ended, as it had no certificate to show she still studied. I am unclear if Mr E received a further bill at this point or became aware of this matter through further telephone contact with the Council. But in any event on 17 December 2018 Mr E provided a further student certificate for Mrs E, showing her studies now continued to 30 August 2019. In doing so he had completed a ‘single person discount’ application rather than a ‘student disregard’ application.
20. The Council sent its final response to Mr E on 10 December 2018, again defending its actions in billing him for council tax and in recovering sums due. It rejected Mr E’s complaints about how it worded its reminder notices and explained what happened at court on 28 November. The Council explained the legal powers it has to recover council tax under the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992. It explained that while it had discretionary powers to serve reminder notices by email this was not current policy.
21. Mr E made a further payment towards his council tax on 18 December 2018. He paid all outstanding sums on the account and costs.

My findings

Council tax billing issues

22. I can find no fault in how the Council billed Mr E for his council tax due for the 2018-19 financial year. The bill it issued on 16 June 2018 identified the time when Mr E had no liability for council tax because both he and Mrs E were students. It also identified that from 27 June onwards a student disregard applied, which reduced Mr E’s bill by 25%. It set out an instalment plan for Mr E to pay the sum due and this clearly said he should pay ‘on or before’ the days listed.
23. I am unclear why the Council did not issue its revised bill to Mr E for his short period of council tax liability in March 2018 until mid-June. However, even if there was fault in that, I cannot see that any injustice to Mr E resulted. Because there is no suggestion the Council chased payment for any sum due before issuing the amended bill for this period showing a nil balance.
24. I am also unclear why Mr E’s council tax bill for the 2018-19 financial year did not show Mrs E’s student disregard ending in September 2018. However, this did not disadvantage Mr E. Because including this change in the June 2018 council tax bill would only have increased the sum due from Mr E. I recognise this matter may have caused some later confusion for Mr E, when the Council noted in December 2018 that Mrs E’s student certificate had expired. But any confusion did not last long as Mr E soon provided another certificate confirming his wife’s studies into 2019. I cannot see the Council asked Mr E to do more than anyone else when applying for such a discount, as it can reasonably require proof of student status.
25. I further recognise that some confusion seems to have arisen about the difference between a student disregard and a single person discount. This is not uncommon. And in this case the effect of both was the same; to reduce Mr E’s council tax bill to 75% of its whole. But again, nothing turns on this. Mr E may have completed the wrong form in December 2018 to extend Mrs E’s student discount, but the Council understood his intent. It acted properly on receiving the information he sent.
26. I have not seen evidence that between 16 June and 5 November 2018 Mr E contacted the Council to query his liability for council tax. Or completed any other forms in the hope or expectation of receiving some discount or reduction of his bill. So, I cannot see any basis for Mr E’s statement that any late instalments were due to him waiting for the Council to clarify the bill he owed.

Council tax recovery issues

27. This leads me next to consider how the Council went on to recover council tax after Mr E missed the first instalment due on 28 July. I find no fault in the reminder notice it sent him. Nor do I find fault in the Council sending a second notice after Mr E missed his second instalment due on 28 August.
28. I note the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 say that after service of a reminder notice, the Council must allow “seven days beginning on the day on which a reminder notice is issued” for the council tax payer to bring their account up to date. Mr E failed to do this on both occasions he received reminder notices. So, the Council could serve him with a final notice after 12 September 2018.
29. I accept this timescale is tight. I also note that in this case Mr E paid his instalment just a few days later. But the Council was not at fault for following the law in its timing of the final notice. I also consider the reminder notices contained enough detail for Mr E to know that if he did not pay within seven days the Council could do this and recover its debt via the magistrates’ court.
30. I accept Mr E did not receive the final demand before the Court issued a summons. However, I cannot find the Council at fault for this. There is nothing irregular in the final notice which it correctly addressed to Mr E. It had no reason to think Mr E would not receive this.
31. I recognise Mr E contacted the Council as soon as he learnt of the summons to attend the magistrates’ court. But I can find no fault in the Council’s decision to continue recovery action at that point of contact. I have checked the Council’s policy towards ‘time to pay’ arrangements where contacted by someone in Mr E’s circumstances. I find the Council responded to Mr E’s contact in line with that policy. In particular, the policy says that even if the Council agrees a revised instalment arrangement to clear council tax arrears it will continue with recovery. I consider that in most circumstances it can reasonably to do this, if there has been no fault in its billing or recovery procedure up to that point. I can see no grounds therefore to find the Council at fault for the charges added to Mr E’s account through its recovery actions.

Back to top

Final decision

32. For the reasons explained above, I cannot uphold this complaint. I find no or insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in its billing or recovery of council tax from Mr E that would lead me to think he has suffered an injustice. I have therefore completed my investigation satisfied with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

33. As I explained in paragraph 5 above, by law we cannot investigate what happens when the Council takes court action or investigate what happens in court. I am therefore unable to investigate Mr E’s concerns about what happened on the day of his liability order hearing. It is for the court to conduct such hearings and decide on the order of business, including how it will hear from defendants who attend such hearings. Mr E must make any complaint about the administration of court business to the court therefore.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman