Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse a council tax exemption, incorrectly issuing Mr X with a summons for unpaid council tax, and for breaching the data protection act. This is because the complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and there is another body better placed to consider Mr X’s complaint. In addition, it is unlikely we would find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to refuse a council tax exemption. He also complains:
• The Council incorrectly issued him with a summons for the whole amount of unpaid council tax, even though it had been partially paid.
• The Council breached the data protection act as it sent a response to a shared email address.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
3. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
4. 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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse a council tax exemption is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is because any dispute about liability for, or exemption from, council tax, can be appealed to a Valuation Tribunal. The tribunal is an expert body, and their decisions are binding on the Council. I see no reason why an appeal could not be made in this case.
8. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is the UK’s independent authority set up to uphold information rights. It promotes openness by public bodies and protects the privacy of individuals. It deals with complaints about public authorities’ failures to comply with data protection legislation. The ICO is better placed to consider Mr X’s complaint about the Council breaching data protection legislation in sending correspondence to a shared email address.
9. With regards to the Council issuing a summons for unpaid council tax, the evidence shows the Council appropriately sent Mr X reminders in April, May, and June 2021 of the balance due. Mr X did not make any payment despite being sent these reminders. The Council explained it did not take recovery action in 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Council followed the appropriate process in issuing the summons as it received no payment from Mr X following the reminders and final notice sent in 2021.
10. The Council also explained why the summons was for the full amount of council tax due, even though a previous liable person had made partial payments. As the previous payments were paid under a different reference number, the Council could not transfer the balance until Mr X provided evidence of the payments. Once Mr X advised the Council of these payments, the Council located the payments and transferred the credit to Mr X’s account reference. The Council also waived the additional costs incurred from issuing the summons. This was appropriate in the circumstances.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and because there is another body better placed to consider the complaint. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman