Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s recovery of unpaid council tax including threats of court action and committal to prison. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council threatening him with court action and prison if he failed to make payments to enforcement agents. He says he was told in a past conversation with the Council that it would not accept payments directly and that he must pay the enforcement agents which he refuses to do as this involves paying their costs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X says he received threatening letters from the Council saying it would take further court action and consider committing him to prison if he failed to make council tax payments agreed following the issue of a liability order. He says he was told in a telephone call with an officer that he must pay the agents and not the Council directly.
7. The Council says it sent the committal letter to Mr X in September 2023 because he had failed to make agreed monthly payments since July 2022. The case is with enforcement agents following a liability order and it is normal procedure for the taxpayer to pay the bailiffs because they have been appointed to collect a debt confirmed by the magistrates court. The Council asked Mr X for details of his claimed telephone conversation because it has informed him previously of the different ways in which he can pay. Mr X has not provided any details about when the alleged call took place.
8. Councils refer debts which have been subject to court proceedings to enforcement agents to collect the outstanding amounts. The agents may make a charge for this service and charges are set out in the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 introduced by the Ministry of Justice. Mr X is subject to charges because he has had a court order referred to the enforcement agents.
9. The Council has written to Mr X and explained the different ways in which he can make payments on a previous occasion. He remains liable for any enforcement agents fees but can pay the Council directly. Because he has made no payment since 2022 the Council is required to inform him in advance about what further court action it may consider. We have no jurisdiction to investigate matters which are or have been subject to court proceedings. Any committal action would require a hearing in the magistrates court.
10. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made. There is insufficient evidence of any fault by the Council in its recovery actions against Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s recovery of unpaid council tax including threats of court action and committal to prison. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman