Watford Borough Council (19 010 136)

Category : Benefits and tax > Council tax

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 23 Jan 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council failed to provide him with a debt enforcement policy and unreasonably took him to court for unpaid Council tax. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council causing injustice.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains that the Council failed to provide him with a debt enforcement policy and took him to court for unpaid Council tax.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I have considered the comments of the complainant and the Council and the complainant has had an opportunity to comment on the draft decision.,

Back to top

What I found

  1. The Council obtained Liability Orders against Mr X for non payment of Council tax in both 2017 and 2018. Arrears of over £4,000 had accrued by August 2018. The Council decided that; as all other recovery options had been exhausted, no income and expenditure form has been returned, there was no application for Council tax support and no payment had been received, an application be made to the court for committal to prison.
  2. The case was adjourned as Mr X attended and an agreement was made to make regular payments towards to the arrears and a single occupation discount was awarded and backdated.
  3. Mr X says that the Council could not provide him with a written policy for debt recovery. The Council says that there is no requirement to have one available to him.
  4. Nevertheless, the Council properly considered the enforcement options available to it. Its decision to pursue committal proceedings was made without fault. In the absence of procedural fault, it is not for the Ombudsman to question the merits of the Council‘s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings