Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about failings by the Council regarding the complainant’s council tax. This is because the Council has provided a fair response and there is not enough remaining injustice to require an investigation. In addition, the complainant can take part of her complaint to the Information Commissioner.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, complains about the way the Council handled a change in her council tax. She suggests the Council breached the General Date Protection Regulation (GDPR). Mrs X thinks the Council should award compensation.

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 Council has provided a fair response, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I read the complaint and the Council’s response. I invited Mrs X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

5. Mrs X has an annexe. She was getting an exemption which meant she did not pay council tax for the annex. In August she contacted the Council to say she was no longer entitled to the exemption. The Council made an error and failed to process the change or record it correctly on the council tax system.
6. A council tax inspector visited in December. She spoke to Mrs X’s daughter about the annex. Before the visit the inspector checked and saw the annex was still listed as being empty and attracting the exemption. The record did not reflect the information Mrs X had provided in August. Mrs X’s daughter felt that the inspector was implying they had done something wrong.
7. Mrs X immediately complained about the Council’s failure to implement the change and about the inspector speaking to her daughter. Mrs X says she had to chase the Council in January because she had not had a reply to her complaint.
8. In response the Council explained it had failed to process the information Mrs X provided in August. It said this had been highlighted as a training need. It said that without the error the additional council tax would have been payable between September and March. But, due to the inconvenience caused, the Council spread the payments between March and August 2020 rather than requiring payment by 31 March as would normally be the case. The Council said it was appropriate for the inspector to have spoken to Mrs X’s daughter because she is an adult and no personal information was discussed. The Council said the daughter reported that the annex was still empty. Mrs X says this is not what her daughter said. The Council apologised for any worry and upset caused. It also said it had overlooked Mrs X’s complaint in December which is why it did not reply until January.
9. Mrs X is dissatisfied with the response and says the Council should pay compensation. She says the Council took from August until late January to issue a revised bill. She disputes that the Council gave an accurate account of what her daughter said and says the Council breached the GDPR by speaking to her. Mrs X says she had to chase the Council to get a response and it has not addressed every point. She says there have been four errors, not the two admitted by the Council. She also says she will have to pay council tax payable for 2019/20 alongside the tax payable for this financial year.

Assessment

10. The Council did not handle this well. It failed to process the change that Mrs X reported in August and it failed to correctly respond to the complaint in December. However, I will not start an investigation because the Council has provided an appropriate response. It has apologised for the worry its actions caused, explained what went wrong and said these errors will be addressed as a training need. It also gave Mrs X a similar time to pay as she would have had if the error had not been made. It explained why it did not feel it was inappropriate for the inspector to have spoken to Mrs X’s daughter. This was a fair and proportionate response by the Council.
11. I also will not start an investigation because, once the Council’s response is taken into account, there is not enough remaining injustice to require an investigation or compensation. Mrs X knew she was now liable to pay council tax for the annexe, which is why she reported the change, so it is reasonable to expect that she would have budgeted for that expenditure while she waited for the adjusted bill. In addition, the Council is asking Mrs X to pay in 2020, what she would have paid as an increased amount of council tax in 2019, had the Council not delayed processing the change. Mrs X has not incurred a financial loss and, while she feels the Council has not addressed every point, and further delayed responding to her complaint, these issues do not represent a degree of injustice which require an investigation.
12. Mrs X has suggested the Council breached the GDPR by speaking to her daughter. I will not investigate this point because Mrs X can complain to the Information Commissioner (ICO). It is reasonable to expect her to do this because the ICO is the appropriate body to consider complaints about personal information.

Back to top

Final decision

13. I will not start an investigation because the Council has provided a fair response and there is not enough remaining injustice to require an investigation. In addition, Mrs X can complain to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman