Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a summons for council tax to an incorrect address. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council sending a summons for council tax to her late relative’s address instead of the address which she had previously provided for executors. She says this caused her upset at a time of family grief and may be the result of systemic Council failure.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X says she received a summons for unpaid council tax relating to a property which belonged to a deceased relative and which she sold in 2022. She had confirmed with the Council in 2023 that the property had been sold and probate had been granted. In 2024 she received a summons for unpaid council tax which had been issued to her late relative at the former address.
6. She contacted the Council and it told her that the liability was for a period following the sale of the property in 2022 and the date of sale provided by the new purchasers which was given as 2023, causing new liability for the extended period. The Council had issued an email enquiry for confirmation of the sale date but this was incorrectly addressed and not received. The automated recovery system then issued reminders and a summons to the previous billing address.
7. The Council apologised on the same day to Mrs X and accepted that it had her address as executor and should have made enquiries to that address. The Council says it had now received confirmation of the sale date and the liability and the summons were withdrawn.
8. Mrs X subsequently made a formal complaint about the Council’s actions. It is clear that the Council had her executor’s address and that it should have sent any correspondence to her relating to her relative’s liability. The Council apologised and although she had suffered some distress for a short time, I consider that an apology for the error was sufficient in this case, as the recovery action was withdrawn the same day.
9. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a summons for council tax to an incorrect address. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman