Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council wrongly sending Mr X a summons for council tax. The Council has offered a payment to Mr X in recognition of its fault, and we cannot add to that. I do not consider the Council’s contact with Mr X about a single person discount caused him sufficient injustice to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council sent him a summons for unpaid council tax for a property he has no connection to. Mr X also complains the Council sent him a text message which indicated he was being investigated for fraud in relation to claiming a council tax discount. Mr X seeks an apology, confirmation that the Council records have been amended and compensation for the distress caused.

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 decid, any remaining injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation or change the outcome of the complaint (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council has acknowledged Mr X was wrongly sent a summons. It has explained Mr X’s name was incorrectly added to a council tax account through human error. The Council has apologised to Mr X for this, confirmed that it has correctly updated its records and offered Mr X £50 in recognition of its fault.
6. While Mr X is unhappy with this outcome, I consider the Council has provided an appropriate remedy. As such, we cannot change the outcome of the complaint and any remaining injustice to Mr X is not sufficient to warrant our involvement. For these reasons, we will not investigate.
7. The Council says it sent Mr X three text messages asking him to confirm his eligibility for single person council tax discount. Its third message mentioned the Government’s National Fraud Initiative and provided a link to a website providing further information about this.
8. While I recognise Mr X was upset to receive this, from our perspective, the injustice caused to Mr X is not sufficient to warrant our involvement as the indication is that fraud was mentioned for information purposes only. We will not therefore investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the remaining injustice caused to him is not sufficient to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman