Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council taking enforcement action over unpaid council tax, or its alledged failure to carry out a care needs assessment for the complainant. This is because the issues about council tax have been subject to legal proceedings and the Council is not the responsible body for carrying out care needs assessments. We therefore have no jurisdiction to investigate these matters. As to the other parts of the complaint, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify us investigating.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mrs P) complains the Council is wrongly taking enforcement action against her for unpaid council tax. Mrs P says the unpaid charges relate to a property she was in the process of purchasing, but due to issues relating to alledged fraud by the seller, she is not the legal owner. She therefore says she is not liable for council tax at the property.
2. In addition, Mrs P complains the Council has failed to carry out a care needs assessment to identify if she has eligible care and support needs which it should meet. She also says the Council has not made reasonable adjustments to support her disability needs, or made a safeguarding referral for her so that action can be taken to support her as a vulnerable adult at risk.
3. In summary, Mrs P says she has felt distressed and alarmed by the Council’s enforcement action and that this has been detrimental to her health and wellbeing. As a desired outcome, she wants the Council to assess her needs for care and support, provide reasonable adjustments when communicating with her and cease its enforcement action.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify this. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. 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).
6. We cannot investigate a complaint where the body complained about is not responsible for the issue being raised. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(1), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Council tax and enforcement action

8. Though I recognise Mrs P disputes she is the legal owner of the property and therefore liable to pay council tax, the Council has obtained liability orders from the magistrates’ court for the amounts demanded. This means a court has made an order that she is legally responsible for the unpaid council tax which, in turn, allows the Council to take enforcement action to recover debts. As I understand, the courts have also allowed the Council to place charges on Mrs P’s property so that when this is sold, she will need to pay the amounts owed from the proceeds. We cannot investigate this issue as we have no legal jurisdiction to do so where the issues have been subject to court proceedings.
9. I note Mrs P has requested the Council cease recovery action and that it has declined to do so. I see no evidence of fault by the Council as it is entitled to take enforcement action to recover the amounts having secured liability orders.

Failure to carry out care needs assessment

10. Local services in the area where Mrs P resides are provided by the Council (a district council) and Surrey County Council (a county council). The Care Act 2014 which covers care needs assessments states district councils do not have a duty to undertake these where the area is covered by a county council. The Council is not therefore responsible for the issue complained about. Rather, this would be Surrey County Council and the Council has explained to Mrs P it has made a referral for her so the appropriate service can action her request. Given the Council is not responsible for the issue, we will not consider this matter further.

Safeguarding referral

11. In addition, Mrs P complains the Council has failed to make a safeguarding referral in order to protect her from abuse and/or neglect. Local authority safeguarding duties are also set out in the Care Act 2014. The Council says it considered making referrals for Mrs P to the county council in December 2021, February 2024 and November 2024. However, having considered the information available, statutory guidance and the relevant legal tests, the Council decided this was not a safeguarding matter which met the required threshold. Having read Mrs P’s complaint in full, I note she has not pointed to any specific fault with respect to this issue. In my view, there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation of this issue.

Reasonable adjustments

12. I have not seen any evidence of Mrs P raising problems relating to reasonable adjustments when first complaining to the Council. When the Council received correspondence from us which referred to Mrs P’s requested adjustments, the Council issued her a stage two complaint response which took account of these. It is unclear from Mrs P’s complaint to us what specific the specific fault alledged is. On the evidence available, the Council has made adjustments on receipt of it being made aware of her request for these. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant further consideration of this issue.

Back to top

Final decison

13. We cannot investigate the complaint relating to council tax because this issue have been subject to court proceedings. Further, the Council is not the body responsible for providing a care needs assessment. As to all other parts of the complaint, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman