Summary: Mr X complains the Council was at fault as it sent enforcement agents to his rental property after he paid the outstanding Council Tax owed. We found fault because the Council did not tell the enforcement agents Mr X had paid the debt. But this fault did not cause Mr X an injustice and so we have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall refer to as Mr X complains about the way the Council dealt with his Council Tax account for a property he rents out. Mr X says he resolved an issue about outstanding Council Tax for the property. But the Council later sent enforcement officers to collect the debt, so his tenants vacated the property causing him distress and loss of rental income.

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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. 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

4. I have read the papers submitted by Mr X. I considered the Council’s comments on the complaint and the supporting documents it provided. I have explained my draft decision to Mr X and the Council and considered the comments received.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X is the landlord of a property in the Council’s area. After contact from Mr X’s property agents the Council created a Council Tax account for him on the property for two periods in 2018. The agent gave Mr X’s contact address.
6. The Council issued the charge to Mr X but received no payment. The Council sent two reminders to Mr X. But as it received no response and the letters were not returned as undeliverable the Council issued a summons in July 2018. The Council received no contact or payment from Mr X and the courts granted a Liability Order in August 2018 allowing the Council to collect the debt.
7. The Council sent the case to enforcement agents to collect. The Council says the enforcement agents sent letters, text messages and tried to contact Mr X by telephone without success.
8. In October 2018 Mr X contacted the Council. He stated he had not received any contact from the Council about Council Tax and only went to the address given by his agents periodically. The Council contacted Mr X by email and asked for a postal address. Mr X advised he did not have one and asked to deal with billing by email. The Council says it is not possible to do so and it currently needs a postal address from residents.
9. Mr X and the Council corresponded over the outstanding Council Tax. The Council agreed to remove some costs, Mr X could pay the amount by direct debit and it would bring the account back from the enforcement agents. In November 2018 Mr X paid the amount in full instead and the Council confirmed the payment.
10. Mr X complained to the Council in March 2019 saying an enforcement officer had visited the property given as Mr X’s address to collect the outstanding Council Tax paid in November 2018. The Council investigated and found it made an error by not telling the enforcement agents Mr X paid the amount due. The Council apologised to Mr X.
11. Mr X complained he rented out the property and the visit caused distress to his tenants. Mr X said the tenants decided to leave the property due to the behaviour of the enforcement agent. Mr X stated he was being put to the inconvenience of ‘re–marketing’ the property and losing rental income. Mr X requested financial redress from the Council. Mr X sent evidence to support his request for compensation.
12. The Council investigated and responded to Mr X’s complaints. It apologised again for the error in not telling the enforcement agents of his payment. The Council replied it and the enforcement agents were unaware Mr X did not live at the address as it was the only contact address supplied for him. The Council confirmed the enforcement agents investigated Mr X’s concerns about the enforcement agent on the visit and viewed the body cam footage from the agent. The Council considered there was no evidence of any misconduct by the enforcement agent. It advised the agent made two short visits to the address and these were less than five minutes in total.
13. The Council considered Mr X’s evidence of a handwritten letter from a person and an email from a letting agency outlining the cost of a standard letting service. It did not consider it enough to outweigh the evidence from the enforcement agents body cam footage so could not offer compensation.
14. In responding to my enquiries, the Council says it considered Mr X’s submission. But it has no evidence any tenants have left the property, or the property is currently unoccupied. The Council says it has not been able to find any evidence online showing the property has been advertised to let.

My assessment

15. Mr X does not complain about the Council’s actions in pursuing him for the Council Tax debt in 2018. But even if he wished to the documents show the Council sent the Council Tax bills for the property to an address supplied by his property management agents. It is for Mr X to provide the Council with a correct or updated address for any Council Tax bills. The Council explained to Mr X it was not possible to do so by email alone.
16. The Council agreed to remove some costs and allow Mr X to pay the amount by direct debit which was the outcome Mr X was seeking. This was suitable action for the Council to take. So, I do not consider I could achieve anything further for Mr X on this matter.
17. Mr X complains about the visit by the enforcement agents. The Council accepted it made an error in failing to tell the enforcement agents Mr X paid the outstanding amount. This is fault by the Council, and it has apologised which I consider is suitable and enough action for it to take. I do not consider it has caused a significant injustice to Mr X to warrant the Council paying financial compensation to Mr X. This is because Mr X has not supplied any evidence to support his allegation and complaint his tenants left the property because of the enforcement agent’s actions. And that he has been put to the costs of re letting it. The Council has considered the information provided by Mr X so far, but it does not consider it is enough to offer compensation. It is for Mr X to submit more information to the Council if he wishes to purse the matter further.
18. The documents show the Council and enforcement agents investigated Mr X’s allegations about the actions of an agent. The Council does not consider the allegations are supported by the body cam footage from the agent. I do not consider I can add anything to the Council’s investigation or reach a different outcome if I investigate the matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I am completing my investigation. There was fault by the Council in failing to inform enforcement agents he had paid the outstanding amount of Council Tax. But the fault has not caused a sufficient injustice to Mr X for the Ombudsman to pursue the matter further.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman