Summary: Ms X complains the Council should not have charged her a summons fee for unpaid council tax. The Ombudsman will not investigate as there has been insufficient fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council was wrong to charge her a summons fee for unpaid council tax because it did not notify her there was an outstanding balance and she believes she has already paid the arrears.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.
  (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the correspondence shared between Ms X and the Council, Ms X’s complaint summary, Ms X’s payment history and the Council’s final response.
4. Ms X has commented on my draft decision. This decision takes account of her comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms X contacted the Council several months after she had purchased her property to register for Council tax.
6. The Council sent Ms X a bill in response, citing the instalments she needed to pay for the 2018/2019 tax year. The bill also included a smaller amount due for the previous tax year.
7. A few days later, the Council sent her another bill. This bill specified that there was an overdue amount of £123.24 relating to the previous tax year and asked Ms X to pay this amount immediately.
8. The Council then sent Ms X a reminder notice, because whilst Ms X was making the required payments for the current tax year, she had not made the payment for the previous tax year. Ms X states she did not receive this notice.
9. The Council sent Ms X a court summons regarding the outstanding payment and Ms X contacted the Council to query this.
10. Ms X paid £123.24, along with a £65 summons fee. She was unhappy about this, and felt the Council failed to make her aware of the overdue Council tax prior to issuing the summons.
11. Ms X complained to the Council, asking it to refund the summons fee.
    The Council maintained it had applied the fee correctly and so Ms X referred her complaint to us.

Back to top

Analysis

12. Having reviewed the initial council tax bill Ms X received, I see it did not show the previous tax year payment as separate to the instalment plan created for the current tax year. I can appreciate this may have caused Ms X confusion.
13. However, the subsequent bill the Council sent Ms X specifically told her to make a separate payment of £123.24 for the previous tax year. I am therefore satisfied the Council made Ms X aware this payment was due.
14. Ms X complains she did not receive the payment reminder sent by the Council.
    I cannot comment as to why this may be. The address shown on the letter matches the address we have on record for Ms X.
15. Ms X did not pay the outstanding council tax payment until it had been overdue for almost six months. I am satisfied the Council made Ms X aware she owed this payment. The Ombudsman would be unlikely to find fault here.
16. The Ombudsman might find fault with the Council’s failure to amend its records to reflect the correct date Ms X bought her house. This meant the Council overcharged Ms X by one day, amounting to £3.74.
17. However, the Council has recently confirmed it has corrected its records and reduced the amount due for the current tax year in line with this. In my view, any injustice to Ms X rom this part of her complaint is minimal.

Back to top

Final decision

The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. He would be unlikely to find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman