Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s proposed method to pay council tax instalments. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation and an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr X, says that after being issued with a Final Notice, the Council would only allow him to set up a direct debit to pay council tax instalments, which he would not do. Mr X says the Council’s attitude was intimidatory and the information he was given was incorrect. Mr X would like the Council’s actions to be considered by our service.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code. I also considered Mr X’s comments in response to my draft decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr and Mrs X received reminders for their April and May council tax instalments. They were advised that a third default would result in their right to pay by instalments being withdrawn.
5. After a third default, the Council issued a Final Notice confirming that the remaining balance for the year was now owed, and that their right to pay by instalments had been formally withdrawn.
6. Mr X complained to the Council and in August it offered to halt recovery action if Mr and Mrs X set up a direct debit. Mrs X advised they were not willing to do this due to security concerns. As Mrs X would not agree to set up a direct debit, Mr X was advised that recovery action would be escalated.
7. Later in August, the Council advised that alternatively, Mr and Mrs X could set up a standing order to continue to pay instalments if they cleared the arrears. On the same day, Mr X made a payment to clear the arrears and set up a standing order.
8. Mr X feels that the Council has been heavy-handed in its approach given the memory loss suffered by Mrs X who normally handles their council tax affairs. Whilst I recognise this contributes to the feeling Mr X has about the Council’s actions, this does not mean the Council’s actions amount to fault. This is because the law allowed the Council to demand immediate payment of all the council tax due for the rest of the year. Often a Council will secure this by obtaining a liability order from the court. In this case, the Council allowed Mr X to avoid court action by setting up a standing order. Mr X complains this was not immediately offered, but as it was a discretionary step, this does not represent fault requiring an investigation.
9. Mr X has now successfully set up a standing order to pay his council tax. It would therefore not be an effective use of our resource to investigate this matter. This is because a resolution has already been achieved and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation and because it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman