Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s pursuit of Mr X for unpaid Council tax and an alleged GDPR breach. This is because Mr X had right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal and this part of the complaint is out of jurisdiction. In addition, the complaint regarding the GDPR breach is a matter for the Information Commissioner’s Office.

The complaint

1. Mr X raised several complaints regarding council tax bills he received from the Council.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
5. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X received several bills from the Council and contacted the Council regarding these bills. Mr X says the Council told him it would send a new bill, but this did not happen.
9. Following this, the Council issued a summons for unpaid Council tax and Mr X received a liability order.
10. Mr X raised a formal complaint about the bills and the liability order he had received. He also complained about a GDPR breach. The Council investigated and explained that the bills were sent whilst the Valuation office agency was valuating Mr X’s property banding. Once the property had received a banding, the Council sent an amended bill and a reminder when the council tax remained unpaid. The Council then began collections activity.
11. The Council confirmed Mr X should refer to the magistrate’s court regarding the liability order and escalated Mr X’s complaint regarding the GDPR breach. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s response and referred the complaint to the Ombudsman.
12. The Ombudsman does not investigate complaints where the complainant has an unused right of appeal, and it would be reasonable for them to use it. In this case, Mr X could refer to the Valuation Tribunal as he disputes liability regarding the unpaid council tax amount.
13. Complaints regarding data breaches are best placed for the Information Commissioner’s office (ICO) to consider. It is open to Mr X to refer this part of the complaint to the ICO if he remains unhappy with the Council’s response.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because Mr X had right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal and this part of the complaint is out of jurisdiction. In addition, the complaint regarding the GDPR breach is a matter for the Information Commissioner’s Office

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman