Summary: There was fault by the Council, which wrongly applied a discount to the complainant’s Council Tax bill. This meant the complainant received an unexpected bill after believing she had paid the full amount, which is an injustice. The Council has agreed to offer her a financial remedy to recognise this injustice.

The complaint

1. I will refer to the complainant as Miss W.
2. Miss W complains the Council has asked her to pay a further amount towards her 2018/19 Council Tax bill, despite accepting it was its own error she was undercharged originally.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Miss W’s correspondence with the Council.
5. I also shared a draft copy of this decision with each party for their comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. In June 2018, the Council obtained a Liability Order against Miss W, as she had made no payments towards her 2018/19 Council Tax bill. In July, the Council passed the debt to enforcement agents (‘bailiffs’).
7. Miss W then contacted the Council to say she had been a single occupier of her property since March. The Council applied the 25% single person discount to Miss W’s bill, reducing it by £350.18.
8. In August, Miss W contacted the Council to say she was having difficulty negotiating an affordable payment agreement with the enforcement agency. The Council said it could not assist her with this.
9. Later the same day, the enforcement agency contacted the Council to ask whether it had applied the single person discount to Miss W’s bill. The Council confirmed it had, and instructed the agency to reduce Miss W’s debt by £350.18. Miss W then agreed a £150 per month payment agreement with the agency.
10. The following day, a different Council officer contacted the enforcement agency. They advised, again, of the single person discount, and asked the agency to reduce Miss W’s bill. The agency therefore deducted £350.18 a second time.
11. Miss W completed her agreed payments at the end of the 2018/19 financial year. In April 2019, she contacted the Council to discuss her payments for the 2019/20 Council Tax bill. The Council then informed Miss W she still had £350.18 to pay from the 2018/19 bill. It asked the enforcement agency to collect this.
12. Miss W made a complaint to the Council on 27 June. The Council responded on 10 July. It explained how the agency had come to reduce the bill twice, and accepted its own officer was at fault for not checking whether the agency had already been informed. It apologised for this, but said Miss W still needed to pay the outstanding amount. However, it said it would recall the debt from the enforcement agency, and invited Miss W to contact the Council Tax department to make a payment arrangement.
13. Miss W made a stage 2 complaint on 11 July. She said the enforcement agency had visited her property the previous month, but she had received no prior correspondence from the Council. She said the Council had not apologised for its error, but simply referred the debt back to the enforcement agency. She accused the Council of having ‘bullied’ her into a payment agreement she could not afford, and said she would make no arrangement to pay back the additional £350.18 while she was paying her current year’s tax.
14. Miss W also complained a Council officer had wrongly told her to complain to the enforcement agency, approximately two weeks beforehand.
15. The Council replied on 14 August. It reiterated its apology for the error, but again said it could not waive the outstanding debt, and asked Miss W to arrangement payment as soon as possible.
16. Miss W referred her complaint to the Ombudsman on 28 August.

Back to top

Legislative background

17. Where a sum of Council Tax is unpaid the Council may seek an order from the magistrates’ court known as a Liability Order. Prior to this, the Council must issue a summons to the person it considers to be liable. Once obtained, the Liability Order confirms the amount owed and who is liable to pay it. The Council then has a number of options available to pursue the debt. One option is to instruct enforcement agents. (Regulation 45 of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992)
18. If a property is occupied by only one person liable to pay Council Tax, they are entitled to a 25% discount.

Back to top

Analysis

19. The Council instructed enforcement agents to recover Miss W’s Council Tax for 2018/19. After doing so, it applied the single person discount at Miss W’s request, reducing the outstanding bill by £350.18.
20. Unfortunately, this information was given twice to the enforcement agency, by two separate officers. This meant the agency wrongly reduced Miss W’s bill by an extra £350.18. The Council accepts this was its own error.
21. The result of this was that, at the point Miss W (and the enforcement agency) believed she had paid back the full amount, there was still £350.18 outstanding. The Council then asked the enforcement agency to recover this. It has since recalled the debt from the agency, but still seeks payment from Miss W. Miss W believes the Council should instead waive the outstanding amount.
22. The Ombudsman’s role is to remedy injustice arising from administrative fault. We normally do this by trying to put the complainant back in the position they would have been, had the fault not occurred.
23. In this case, although the Council was at fault, I cannot find that its continued pursuit of the outstanding amount is, in itself, an injustice. This money is properly owed, and, if there had been no fault, Miss W would still have had to pay it. For this reason, I cannot recommend the Council waive the outstanding amount.
24. I also note the Council has recalled the debt from the agency, and offered Miss W the opportunity to make an agreement for its payment, which is positive.
25. However, I am satisfied the Council’s error has also caused Miss W distress, and she has been put to some time and trouble in attempting to resolve it. This should not have happened and is an injustice, which the Council should address by offering Miss W a financial remedy.
26. Miss W says she was ‘bullied’ into making an unaffordable payment agreement with the enforcement agency. However, the Council is required by law to collect Council Tax. Failure to pay at the appropriate time can lead to a person being in considerable financial difficulty, especially once the tax for subsequent year(s) also becomes due. I do not see evidence of fault here.
27. Miss W also says a Council officer wrongly told her the fault was with the enforcement agency, and that she needed to complain to the agency.
28. I can see no objective evidence about this, and so I cannot make a finding. However, I note Miss W referred to this conversation occurring approximately the same time she made her first complaint to the Council; and so, even if she was wrongly told to complain to the enforcement agency first, it does not appear to have caused a delay in the complaints process. I do not consider this is a significant point.

Back to top

Summary

29. The Council wrongly instructed the enforcement agency to deduct Miss W’s single person discount twice. This meant some of her tax was still due after both she and the agency believed it was paid off.
30. I cannot recommend the outstanding amount be waived, because Miss W would still have had to pay it even if there had been no fault by the Council.
31. However, the Council’s error caused Miss W distress and time and trouble, which it should remedy.

Agreed action

32. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to offer to pay Miss W £150, in recognition of the distress and time and trouble its error caused her.
33. The Council may choose to do this by reducing the outstanding amount from Miss W’s 2018/19 Council Tax bill.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman