Summary: The Ombudsman finds there is fault by the Council regarding its recovery of council tax from Mr and Ms D. We recommended a remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall refer to as Mr D, complains the Council is unfairly pursuing recovery of council tax arrears when he and his partner Ms D were paying by direct debit. He says the Council has failed to take account of Ms D’s vulnerability and this is causing distress.

Back to top

What I have investigated

2. I have investigated how the Council has taken recovery action regarding council tax arrears from March 2018.
3. I have not investigated Mr D’s complaint that Ms D should not be liable for part of the council tax for 2014 because her previous partner should also be liable. The reason for this is that this complaint is late. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended).
4. I do not consider there are good reasons to investigate this matter. Ms D was solely liable for council tax from April 2014 and received a single person discount. I would have expected her to raise the issue of liability at the time. In addition, the law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. 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).
5. In this case Ms D could have appealed to the Valuation Tribunal if she felt the Council’s decision that she should be solely liable from April 2014 was wrong. I consider it was reasonable to expect Ms D to appeal regarding this matter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

6. 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)
7. 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

8. I have considered the complaint and the copy correspondence provided by the complainant. I have made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. I have also considered Mr and Ms D’s comments on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

9. Ms D was solely liable for council tax at her previous address from April 2014. She had arrears of over £1300 for 2014- 2017 for which the Council had obtained liability orders in court. She was paying £15 per month towards these arrears having made an arrangement with the Council. From April 2017 the Council set up a new account. The account was a joint account with her husband Mr D. The Council obtained a liability order for 2017/18. Ms D was paying £25 per month towards the 2017/18 liability order.
10. Mr and Ms D moved in 2018 and continued paying the council tax they had arranged. The Council reviewed the arrangements in June 2018. The Council sent Ms D an income and expenditure form. Ms D did not complete the form but said they wanted to continue paying £15 and £25 by direct debit as their income had not changed. She also said “however, my current address has not been banded for council tax purposes.”
11. The Council asked for bank details to set up a direct debit. It also stated, “when the property is banded, we would require you to contact and set up a new arrangement.” It wrote confirming the arrangement to pay £25 per month by direct debit to cover the arrears of £274.
12. The Council could not send bills for Mr and Ms D’s new address because the Valuation Office needed to band the property. When the Valuation Office notified the Council, it sent Mr and Ms D a bill for the new address in July 2018. The Council advised the instalments were £32 per week by direct debit.
13. Mr and Ms D did not pay the council tax for the new address. The Council sent a reminder in September 2018. It then sent a summons in October 2018, adding the costs of £75, because it had no payments or contact from Mr and Ms D. The Council obtained liability order in October for £1213. It advised Mr and Ms D.
14. In November 2018 the Council applied a council tax reduction to the new address account from 2018. This reduced the outstanding amount from £1213 to £754. However, this was not the full council tax reduction the Council should have paid. This was fault.
15. The Council sent a new bill for £754 to Mr and Ms D. Mr and Ms D did not pay or contact the Council, so it passed the account to its enforcement agent. The agent added fees of £75 and contacted Mr and Ms D regarding the arrears of £829.
16. Mr and Ms D called the Council in December 2018. They said they were already paying £15 per month and £25 per month and could not pay more than this. The Council explained their payments did not cover the current year’s council tax. The Council noted their request to take the debt back from the enforcement agent because Ms D was vulnerable. But it said that it had not received any information about this previously. The Council asked for evidence of Ms D’s vulnerability. Mr D had in fact advised the Council in 2017 that Ms D was vulnerable. The Council accepted this without asking for evidence and had withdrawn the account from the enforcement agent. The Council failed to recognise it had this information in 2017. This was fault.
17. The Council sent an email to Mr D explaining Ms D had £1230 arrears on the old account in her sole name which she was paying at £15 a month. It said that they also had arrears of £904 on the new account. They had agreed to pay £150 of this at £25 per month. The Council had sent bills and letters about the remaining amount on the new account, but Mr and Ms D had not paid. It had therefore sent the account to its enforcement agent. The Council noted Ms D said she could not pay more than £40 per month. However, it said it could not accept payments at this level on arrears over £2000. The Council also noted Mr D had advised Ms D was vulnerable. But it said it was not aware of this. It asked for evidence so it could consider withdrawing the account from its agent. It put a hold on the action.
18. Mr D complained in January 2019. He said the Council told him the council tax reduction would continue when they moved. But in June 2018 it said they must make a new claim. They claimed but it then did not backdate their claim. He said Mrs D was paying £25 towards the council tax arrears and the £15 which he paid was for the arrears and the current council tax year according to the arrangement. However, he said the Council had allocated all the payments to the arrears and none to the current year. He had not received any notice of the amounts due until the enforcement agent contacted them. He said Council officers refused to listen. He explained they had informed the Council many times regarding Ms D’s vulnerability, but the Council denied this.
19. In January 2019 the Council replied to Mr D’s complaint. It said Ms D had contacted it in April 2017 and it accepted she was vulnerable. It had withdrawn the account from its enforcement agents and agreed an arrangement of £15 per month. The Council also explained Ms D had agreed to pay £25 per month for the new account, but only for the period up to March 2018 because the Valuation Office had not banded their new property. The Council said it had no record that it had agreed both addresses were covered by the payment arrangement. The Council said it had sent bills when the property was banded and had followed the billing and notice process, obtaining a liability order when they had not paid. The Council confirmed it had received their income and expenditure form, but needed further information. It said it had suspended recovery and would consider the information when it was received. The Council noted Mr D’s complaint regarding the council tax reduction. It confirmed it had paid part of the council tax reduction but a further £394 was due to be paid. It apologised for its error. The Council sent a statement of account showing the council tax due and payments made.
20. Mr D complained again in January 2019 because he said the enforcement agent had sent threatening letters even though he had responded to the Council’s request in time. It appears the Council did not extend the suspension on recovery, while it was considering the matter. This was fault.
21. In February 2019, Mr D and Ms D sent more information regarding income and outgoings, and evidence of Ms D’s vulnerability. The Council withdrew the account from its enforcement agent, removing the fees of £75. It accepted the offer to pay £50 per month Mr and Ms D had made in their income statement, for the debt it had taken back. The Council wrote to Mr and Ms D confirming the arrangement to pay the £359 outstanding at £50 per month.
22. Mr D paid £150 in February 2019. The Council allocated this against three £50 monthly instalments. When the Council tried to take a direct debit payment for £50 in June 2019, Mr D’s bank rejected this. The Council cancelled the £50 arrangement and sent a notice of liability order to Mr D and Ms D stating the amount outstanding was £209 and that it would consider enforcement agent action if it was not paid or an arrangement made.
23. Mr D complained to the Council that he and Ms D had made many arrangements and were continuing to pay. He said the Council had wrongly obtained a liability order for 2018/19 and should not threaten enforcement action. He considered they had arranged to pay £15 towards the current year’s liability and £25 for arrears. He said they had not arranged to pay £50 per month.
24. Ms D called the Council shortly afterwards and arranged to pay £33 per month for the current year 2019/20 and £10 per month for the arrears for 2018/19.

Analysis

25. Mr D says the Council was wrong to obtain a liability order for 2018/19 because they were paying an arrangement. It appears Mr D considers they were either paying all or part of the £15 payment or the £25 payment to pay the current year, 2018/19. However. I have not seen any evidence the Council agreed to this. The £15 arrangement was for the arrears for 2014-31/3/17. The £25 arrangement was for the old address for the period April 2017 to March 2018. The Council advised Mr and Ms D when they made these arrangements.
26. The Council obtained a liability order for 2018/19 after sending the appropriate notices to Mr and Ms D. As the Council received no response it obtained a liability order in October 2018. I note Mr D and Ms D say they did not receive the Council’s bills and notices. However, the Council has provided copies of the letters and states the Royal Mail did not return any letters as undelivered. I have not found evidence of fault here.
27. Mr D said the Council denied it knew about Ms D’s vulnerability. I have found fault here because the Council had accepted this in April 2017. The Council’s responses by telephone and letter in December 2018 did not recognise this, causing frustration. I do not find there is fault by the Council in requesting evidence of vulnerability, although it could have done this earlier.
28. I consider the Council was at fault by when it did not continue its hold on the enforcement agent’s action while it was considering Mr and Ms D’s income statement and her vulnerability. This led to further unnecessary contact by the agents causing anxiety.
29. The Council delayed applying the full council tax reduction. The Council has accepted it paid part of the council tax reduction but did not note this until Mr and Ms D complained. This was fault. I note the Council has apologised.

Agreed action

30. I recommended and the Council has agreed within one month of my decision to:
• Apologise for its failure to note it already had a record of Ms D’s vulnerability.
• Pay Mr and Ms D £100 for the distress and anxiety due to the delay and faults I have identified. I agree that this can be offset against outstanding council tax.

Back to top

Final decision

31. I found fault by the Council. I have completed my investigation and closed the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman