Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the council tax for the complainant’s late father’s house. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and the complainant could complain to the Information Commissioner.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X. complains about the way the Council managed the council tax for his late father’s house. Mr X says the Council had no right to send the bill to the solicitor (executor) which meant the council tax was hidden from him for four years. Mr X says he would have been aware of the council tax if the Council had sent him the bill.

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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner (ICO) 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 considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X jointly owned a property with his father. In September 2017 the solicitor (executor) told the Council that Mr X’s father had died. An executor has the authority to deal with the estate and affairs of the deceased.
6. The Council sent the council tax bill to Mr X in November 2017. Mr X contacted the Council in January 2018 after he received the final demand. Mr X explained he was ill and unemployed. The Council put recovery action on hold pending sale of the property. The Council agreed to send the council tax bills to the solicitor. The solicitor said they would contact the Council when the funds were available to pay the council tax. The Council kept the account on hold pending settlement of the estate.
7. Mr X moved into the property in April 2021. In July 2021 the solicitor told the Council they were no longer involved. At this point Mr X owed £6102 in council tax. It appears there was a breakdown in the relationship between Mr X and the solicitor.
8. The Council asked Mr X to start making payments as it no longer appeared that payment would be made from the estate or sale of the property. The Council has set up a payment plan for £30 a month.
9. Mr X says the Council had no authority to send the bill to the solicitor and did not have written consent that the solicitor could deal with the council tax.
10. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. Mr X has been aware of his council tax liability since 2017 and contacted the Council in January 2018. He was aware council tax was due and would have to be paid if not settled from the estate. If Mr X did not want the Council to have contact with the solicitor then he could have made that clear when he called the Council in January 2018.
11. No payments were made from 2017 to 2021 which is why Mr X now has arrears. As joint owner, regardless of the actions of the solicitor, Mr X was liable for the council tax from when his father died. The Council has set up a payment plan and is aware Mr X is on a low income. Mr X would also have been aware of the solicitor’s involvement and the Council explained it had put action on hold as it initially appeared the council tax would be paid from the estate. There is nothing to suggest fault by the Council and no reason to start an investigation.
12. If Mr X thinks the Council sent information to the solicitor without consent then he could complain to the ICO. It is reasonable to expect him to do that because the ICO is the appropriate body to consider complaints about the handling of personal information.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. In addition, Mr X could complain to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman