Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about court costs for council tax arrears. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council took him to court for council tax arrears, and charged costs, even though he had arranged to pay by direct debit. Mr X wants the Council to refund the court costs of £45.

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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence, the new council tax bill, and the reminder. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X had a direct debit in place to pay his council tax. Mr X had been jointly liable for the council tax with his wife. In 2021 the Council found out Mr X had separated from his wife. It created a new council tax account in Mr X’s sole name and sent a bill in May 2021. The bill listed the dates manual payments were due by.
5. Mr X did not make the payments because he thought the council tax was being paid by direct debit. The Council issued a reminder in July because the account was in arrears. It asked Mr X to pay £528 by 6 August. It said that if he did not pay then the full amount would be due by 13 August and, if not paid, legal action would follow. Mr X did not take any action as he thought the letter was an administrative error.
6. The Council issued a summons in August and charged court costs of £45. Mr X contacted the Council to complain that his council tax was paid by direct debit. In response the Council explained that when it set up the new account in his sole name the existing direct debit became invalid and would not be accepted by the bank. The Council said that direct debit was not mentioned on the May 2021 bill and he would not have incurred any costs if had responded to the reminder.
7. Mr X is dissatisfied with the response. He disagrees that the Council could not use the existing direct debit. He says the Council did not send a final reminder and has fabricated policy. He has paid the council tax but wants the Council to refund the court costs.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council sent Mr X a bill which said payments were due by manual payment. Mr X may disagree that the previous direct debit would not work but the Council told him that under the new account he was registered for manual payments. I appreciate Mr X may not have checked the bill because he thought there was a direct debit in place, but it is reasonable to expect he would have taken some action when he received the reminder. He could have checked if the direct debits were being taken or he could have contacted the Council. Through the reminder the Council notified Mr X that he would incur additional costs if he did not bring the account up to date. In addition, if someone does not pay a reminder within seven days the full amount becomes due after a further seven days. The Council was not required to issue another reminder. The Council provided Mr X with enough information to avoid the court costs and it followed the correct process.

Back to top

Final decision

9. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman