Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about historic council tax arrears and bailiff fees. 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 instructed bailiffs for a property he has not lived in for four years. Mr X wants the Council to waive the bailiff fees.

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. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. In 2018 Mr X told the Council he was moving out a property. He did not provide a forwarding address. The Council produced a closing council tax bill of £72. It sent the bill, and all subsequent letters, to the last known address it had for Mr X. None of the letters were returned to the Council.
5. Mr X did not pay the outstanding council tax so the Council issued a summons which increased the arrears by £69.
6. Mr X was unaware of the arrears until 2022 when he was contacted by bailiffs. The bailiffs gave Mr X the chance to pay without incurring any further costs but Mr X did not respond. The bailiffs took further action and added a £75 fee.
7. Mr X paid £217 and complained. In response the Council explained he owed council tax when he left, had not provided a forwarding address and had been given an opportunity to pay before incurring bailiff fees. The Council said there was a possibility he did not get the final bill so it refunded the bailiff fee of £75.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. If Mr X had provided his new address then the Council could have sent the closing bill to that address. But, as he did not, the Council had to send the bills, and the subsequent letters, to the last known address. A summons must be sent by post and, as none of the letters were returned, the Council could not know Mr X was unaware of the debt. Mr X might have arranged for his post to be forwarded or it is possible his former landlord might have forwarded post. The Council followed the correct process and has a duty to collect council tax to protect public funds. But, despite this, it refunded the bailiff fee.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We 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