Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the complainant’s council tax. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about the way the Council handled his council tax for his previous home. He wants the Council to waive the council tax that was outstanding.

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 an investigation if we believe the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I found out that Mr X did not incur any costs. I invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

4. Mr X became liable for council tax in June 2017. He arranged to pay by direct debit. In August the Council was wrongly told that new tenants had moved in on 29 July 2017. It sent Mr X a closing bill for £29 which it collected in September.
5. In November 2017 Mr X told the Council he was moving in December 2017. The Council failed to notice this date and the council tax record continued to wrongly reflect that he had moved in July.
6. The Council realised the error early in 2019. It issued a bill for £493 for the unpaid council tax from July to December 2017. It asked for the bill to be paid by 12 March.
7. Mr X did not pay the bill so the Council issued a court summons in July. Mr X said this happened while he was still trying to get the Council to reply to his many complaints. Mr X paid all the council tax before the court hearing. The Council says Mr X did not incur any costs.
8. The Council has apologised for the delay in issuing the correct bill and for failing to identify, in 2017, that Mr X moved in December, not July. It also said it would have been better if it had discussed payments rather than demanding full payment by March. The Council declined to pay compensation.
9. Mr X says the Council should waive the £493 because of the length of time it took to issue a correct bill and because of the delay in getting the Council to reply to his complaints. He says it was heavy handed of the Council to issue a summons while he was still complaining.

Assessment

10. The Council made mistakes in the management of Mr X’s account. It failed to notice, in 2017, that Mr X had not moved in July. And it took until 2019 to realise and correct this error. It then asked for one payment rather than contacting Mr X to explore payment in instalments.
11. However, while the Council made mistakes there is not enough injustice to warrant an investigation. In reaching this view I have taken into account that Mr X has only been charged the council tax he was liable for from July to December 2017. There was a delay in the Council issuing a correct bill but Mr X still benefited from the services paid for through council tax and he has not incurred any costs. In addition, Mr X could have contacted the Council in 2017 to ask why he had received a final bill or to query why the Council had stopped taking payments via the direct debit.
12. Mr X has had to spend time complaining and trying to sort things out. Some of this stress could have been avoided if the Council had offered a payment plan in 2019. But, equally, as Mr X knew he owed council tax for this period, he could have paid promptly so the Council did not need to take recovery action.
13. The Council could have handled this better but it has apologised and explained what went wrong. Mr X has had to spend time complaining but the impact is not so significant as to require an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman