London Borough of Enfield (20 002 811)

Category : Benefits and tax > Council tax

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 06 Oct 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this council tax complaint and general complaint that the Council is not dealing with issues in the complainant’s area. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, the Ombudsman cannot achieve what the complainant hopes for, and because the Ombudsman has no power to investigate recruitment issues.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council sent a threatening council tax reminder to his wife. He also says the Council does not deal with environmental issues and the make-up of senior Council staff does not adequately reflect the racial diversity of the borough.

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 an investigation if we believe:
  • it is unlikely we would find fault, or
  • we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

  1. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about a personnel (employment) issue. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 4, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I read the complaint and spoke to Mr X. I considered the Council’s replies and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

  1. Mr & Mrs X are jointly liable to pay the council tax. They were due to pay an instalment by 1 December 2019. The Council did not receive the payment so it issued a reminder on 16 December. It received the payment on 20 December. Mr X says the reminder was threatening and insulting. He also says the Council only sent it to his wife and she found it very distressing. Mr X says the language used in the reminder was akin to treating people like slaves.
  2. Mr X complained to the Council. He also complained about rubbish between transferred between vehicles and said the racial demographic of senior staff was unrepresentative. In response the Council said it would have sent the reminder to Mr & Mrs X because they are jointly liable. It apologised because they were upset but denied the language was inappropriate. It confirmed it had correctly issued the reminder because the payment was late. The Council also said an officer had visited the area and seen lorries transferring waste. The Council told Mr X this is not illegal although it had given advice on keeping the highway clean and the police had seized an uninsured vehicle. The Council said it had consulted with the Environment Agency. The Council explained to Mr X the steps it takes during recruitment to make sure all applicants are treated fairly.
  3. Mr X is dissatisfied with the Council’s response. He has repeated that the council tax reminder was threatening. He says the Council takes no action with regards to issues such as inappropriate parking, cycling on the path, fly tipping and rubbish being transferred between lorries. He has also repeated that the make-up of the council is not representative. Mr X wants the issues he is unhappy about changed.

Assessment

  1. I will not start an investigation for the following reasons. Mr X was late paying his council tax so the Council was correct to send a reminder. I have read an example of the reminder and it is not threatening or insulting. The Council used standard wording, similar to that used by other councils. I cannot comment on whether the reminder was sent only to Mrs X because I have not seen the actual reminder. However, as Mrs X is jointly liable it would not be wrong to have sent her a reminder.
  2. Mr X has raised a number of issues affecting his local area. I can only comment on those issues he raised with the Council as part of this complaint. The Council has visited several times, sometimes with the police, and taken what action it can in relation to an activity that is not unlawful. It also took advice from the Environment Agency. If there are other issues Mr X can raise them with his local councillors or report specific problems to the Council. There is no suggestion of fault in the way the Council responded and I cannot change all the issues Mr X is unhappy about.
  3. Mr X says the make-up of the Council does not reflect the racial diversity of the borough. I cannot investigate this issue because the law prevents the Ombudsman from investigating any employment issue. This includes recruitment practices.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, I cannot achieve the outcome the complainant wants, and because I cannot investigate recruitment practices.

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