Summary: Ms X complained the Council acted unreasonably when it issued a summons and engaged bailiffs in respect of a council tax debt. We found no fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains about action the Council took in respect of alleged council tax arrears for 2018/19. Ms X says that during the period in question she made payments and at the point the Council obtained a summons she was not in arrears. She complains that the Council’s recovery action was unreasonable.

Back to top

What I have investigated

2. I have only investigated Ms X’s complaint about the recovery action taken in respect of Council Tax. I have not considered whether the amounts of Council Tax Reduction (CTR) were correct during the period in question. The reasons for this are set out in the last section of this statement.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. I considered Ms X’s complaint and the information she provided. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its response to the complaint.
6. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. During 2017 Ms X became self-employed. The jobs she did were not regular, so her income fluctuated in 2017 and 2018. This led to her claims for Council Tax Reduction (CTR) being amended numerous times.
8. My investigation is focussed on the position with Ms X’s council tax account for 2018/19 and recovery action the Council took as a result of arrears.
9. The Council issued Ms X’s council tax bill for 2018/19 on 23 March 2018. It stated the amount payable was £968.47 after taking account of her single person discount. It did not include any CTR.
10. At the end of April the Council sent a revised bill including an allowance of CTR. It reduced the amount payable to £244.33. In May a revision to CTR led to an amended council tax bill. It changed the amount due slightly to £245.40. This bill set out instalments. One payment of £20.40 was due for June, followed by nine payments of £25.00 per month from 1 July 2018 to March 2019.
11. In April and May Ms X made payments of £24.00 and £30.00 respectively. On 5 June Ms X made a payment of £9.36. These payments were used to clear arrears from 2017/18.
12. Ms X paid £20.00 for her 2018/19 council tax on 5 June.
13. On 5 June Ms X’s entitlement to CTR changed again. The amount of council tax due was amended slightly as a result. A new bill was issued. It took account of the £20.00 paid and set out new instalments. These were £7.59 on 1 July and eight payments of £28.00 on 1 August to 1 March 2018 inclusive.
14. On 14 July 2018 Ms X paid £25.00.
15. On 1 August 2018 following a decision to significantly reduce Ms X’s CTR, the Council sent another revised bill. It stated CTR had reduced to £117.50. The bilI took account of the £20 and £25 payments Ms X had made. It required a payment of £115.97 on 1 September followed by six payments of £115.00.
16. Ms X made a payment of £20 on 22 August 2018.
17. As the instalment required for August was £115.97, and Ms X paid £20.00, the Council issued a reminder stating £95.97 was outstanding. It stated Ms X needed to make a payment of £95.97 by 19 September, otherwise the right to pay by instalments would be lost.
18. As no further payment was received, the Council issued a final reminder. It stated the full remaining balance (£785.97) was now due. If it was not received by 5 October a summons would be issued.
19. Ms X made a payment of £25 on 23 October.
20. Ms X’s council tax account was still in arrears, so the Council issued a summons. This led to court costs of £101.50 being added to Ms X’s account on or around 23 October.
21. Ms X complained. She asked the Council for a breakdown of the assessment of her CTR and stated she had contacted the Valuation Tribunal to discuss challenging the decision on her CTR claim. She asked for the summons to be placed on hold pending the outcome of the appeal.
22. On 2 November 2018 the Council sent a response to Ms X. It confirmed the payments she had made and explained the Council Tax instalments due from its bill in August. It acknowledged Ms X had begun an appeal against the CTR decision. However, it stated it could not hold recovery action while the appeal was being considered.
23. On 7 November the Council received payments totalling £10.87.
24. On 8 November the Council issued a revised bill because it had increased the amount of CTR and awarded £717.19. This reduced Ms X’s outstanding council tax to £150.41.
25. Ms X attended a court hearing on 9 November 2018 and discussed her account. The Council told us that it recognised Ms X had experienced financial difficulties. Notes on the Council’s files show it decided to withdraw the summons as the amount of council tax due was now relatively small. As a result, the Council removed the summons cost of £101.50 added in October.
26. After the hearing, the Council wrote to Ms X asking her to pay £37.00 per month from December to March inclusive to clear arrears of £150.41.
27. On 5 December the Council decided that it had overpaid CTR to Ms X of £236.81 for 2018/19. It adjusted her council tax bill to recover the overpayment through her council tax payments. This increased the amount outstanding by £236.81 (from £150.41 to £387.22). It sent a new payment arrangement that set out the required instalments. It stated £39.41 was due 1 December 2018, £115.81 was due 1 January 2019 and £116.00 was due on 1 February and 1 March.
28. Ms X paid £39.00 on 17 December and £25.00 on 19 January.
29. On 10 January Ms X had a meeting with an officer to discuss her claim and council tax account. The notes on the Council’s files stated the officer explained the payments being received from Ms X were not correct and that any changes to her income, such as overtime, would result in adjustments to her bill.
30. As the payments set out in December had not been paid, the Council cancelled the payment arrangement on 13 January. Ms X told the Council she had provided payslips and her contract which set out the date her employment ended. She stated she would send her P45 as soon as it was received and asked that the claim was dealt with urgently on receipt.
31. On 24 January the Council issued a summons as Ms X’s council tax remained in arrears. It stated Ms X was in arrears by £86.41. This was £150.41 minus the £64.00 paid by Ms X in December and January. An additional £101.50 was added for summons costs. (The summons only concerned outstanding council tax, not the overpaid benefits of £236.81.)
32. On 1 February the Council sent a reminder for the full amount outstanding for council tax, summons cost and overpaid benefits. This was for £424.72.
33. Ms X attended court on 15 February to challenge the outstanding amount. The case was adjourned.
34. On 25 February 2019 the Council amended Ms X’s bill, granting additional CTR. It amended the amount due to £661.47. This reduced the outstanding council tax to £142.13. The Council also withdrew the summons and the court costs of £101.50 added in January.
35. On 27 February 2019 the Council issued a further amended bill. The Council says this was due to a change to Ms X’s CTR claim because of an additional overpayment of benefit. The overpayment of £111.82 increased the outstanding council tax to £253.95.
36. In March 2019 the Council agreed not to recover £101.20 of the overpaid benefit. It says the overpayment was an error on the Council’s part. It wrongly included a “family premium” Ms X was not entitled to. It agreed it was not reasonable to expect Ms X to have been aware of this error. This reduced Ms X’s council tax liability down to £152.75.
37. On 10 April the Council wrote to Ms X noting correspondence from her about her council tax account. The Council stated £152.75 was due in full, immediately. It directed Ms X to the benefits team to query CTR.
38. Ms X made a payment of £10.62 on 16 April and £25 on 30 April. This reduced the outstanding council tax balance to £117.13.
39. On 7 May the Council issued a summons because Ms X had not paid the arrears in full. This added costs of £101.50, so the arrears became £218.63.
40. The initial court hearing was adjourned, but a Liability Order was granted at a hearing in June. This added £25 to the outstanding amount, making it £243.63.
41. On 24 June Ms X’s account was passed to bailiffs. This resulted in a £75 compliance fee being added to the account by the bailiffs when they contacted her on 17 August. This increased the total outstanding amount to £318.63.
42. Ms X made payments to the bailiffs between September 2019 and April 2020, totalling £243.63. This cleared the outstanding council tax, but not the £75 bailiffs compliance fee.
43. Ms X stated when she queried the Council Tax due, she was not given clear information. Ms X complains the Council should not have passed her account to bailiffs in June 2019 as she was waiting for a Valuation Tribunal Hearing at that time.

Was there fault by the Council

44. The numerous changes to Ms X’s eligibility for CTR meant the Council issued nine new council tax bills to Ms X during 2018/19. Each change to CTR affected the amount outstanding for Ms X’s council tax. This inevitably caused a degree of confusion.
45. Our investigation concerns the way the Council dealt with council tax billing rather than the decisions it reached about CTR. Ms X has separately appealed against the Council’s decisions in respect of CTR, this means the Ombudsman is legally barred from considering whether the benefits decisions were correct.
46. I have considered the council tax bills issued and the amounts Ms X paid to the Council towards her council tax. It seems clear that Ms X continued to make some payments, but unfortunately these payments were not always the correct sums. As a result of this, and because her payments changed at various points during the year, Ms X built up some arrears.
47. Ms X considers the council were wrong to issue her with a summons. The Council wrote off the first two summons charges applied to Ms X’s account, so I have focussed on the third summons charge applied in May 2019. Because of the arrears, Ms X had already lost the ability to pay by instalments by this point. At the time the Council issued the summons, she owed council tax of £117.13. The summons fee increased this by £101.20. Ms X paid the outstanding council tax over nine payments but this left the bailiff fee of £75. I understand Ms X has made payments direct to the bailiffs to repay this.
48. I can see that Ms X continued to make some payments throughout the period in question. However, as these did not cover the amounts due, I do not find fault in the Council’s decision to issue a summons. Given there were arrears at the time the summons was issued, this was a decision the Council was entitled to make.
49. The Council has issued a summons and obtained a liability order, so it was entitled to pass the account to bailiffs. Taking that action was not fault by the Council. It is entitled to take action to recover council tax arrears.
50. Ms X says she believes she has paid twice for her council tax. I have set out the changes made to her council tax account in this statement and the various payments applied to her account. I do not consider there is evidence she paid twice for her council tax for 2018/19.
51. In response to my draft decision, Ms X questioned whether the Council had taken account of all the payments she had made. She provided a list of payments made which we checked against the information the Council had provided. We made additional enquiries to check several discrepancies with the Council. We were satisfied that the payments Ms X made were properly attributed to her council tax accounts. Some of the payments in question were paid towards council due for 2019/20 and 2020/21.
52. As I have not found fault in the council’s decisions to issue a summons to Ms X or to engage bailiffs, I intend to complete my investigation and close my file.

Back to top

Final decision

53. There was not fault by the Council.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

54. Ms X pursued an appeal to the Valuation Tribunal in September 2019. The appeal was about the amount of Council Tax Reduction due to Ms X. The appeal panel determined that the maximum amount of Council Tax Reduction was paid to Ms X. Where someone has used a right of appeal to challenge a decision a council has paid, the Ombudsman is legally barred from considering the same issue.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman