Summary: Mr X complains that the Council refused to refund money he paid to enforcement agents with respect to an alleged council tax debt. I have stopped investigating this complaint. The Council offered to refund the money and so no further action by the Ombudsman is needed.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council refused to refund money he paid to enforcement agents with respect to an alleged council tax debt.

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 or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

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

3. 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

4. I examined the complaint and background information provided by Mr X and the Council. I sent a draft decision statement to Mr X and the Council. I considered the comments of both sides on the draft decision statement. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its further comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council’s revenues team contacted Mr X in June 2019 to say it was aware of his student status but it wanted information on his wife’s visa before it could award a full council tax exemption.
6. The Council says it did not receive a reply from Mr X and so it decided to issue a bill in July 2019. It sent the bill in July and a reminder in August 2019. This was followed by a summons letter in September.
7. Mr X says he wrote to the Council in September 2019. I have seen a copy of the September 2019 email which is time stamped with the September date as well as time.
8. The Council says it did not hear further from Mr X and so it proceeded to obtain a liability order from the Magistrates’ court in October 2019. It instructed enforcement agents in the same month.
9. Mr X says he wrote again to the Council in November 2019. I have seen a copy of the email again with a date and time stamp.
10. The Council says the first contact it had with Mr X was in March 2020. It says Mr X then provided the missing information it needed. The Council awarded Mr X an exemption in April 2020. It credited X’s account with the council tax amount he had paid. Mr X then had the option of applying for a refund.
11. Mr X applied for a refund. He sought not just the council tax amount but the entire sum he paid to the bailiffs.
12. The Council told Mr X that it had to see the evidence that he had provided the information it required before it instructed the enforcement agents. So, Mr X provided the information. The Council said the information Mr X provided was in an unreadable format and so it could not establish whether Mr X sent any information before March 2020.
13. Mr X then complained to the Ombudsman.
14. During my investigation, we established that Mr X had sent two emails to the Council in September and November 2019. An investigation by the Council’s IT department also established that the Council did not receive either email.
15. As the Council did not receive the emails, I cannot make a finding on the matter of fault. However, the Council recognised Mr X should not be penalised because he made efforts to contact it. The Council agreed to refund the sum Mr X paid the enforcement agents.
16. The Council had already made a partial refund to Mr X. It agreed to refund the remainder which is a total of £384.50.

Back to top

Final decision

17. I discontinued investigation of this complaint because the Council agreed to a refund of the sum Mr X paid the enforcement agents.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman