Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a council tax query and summons because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, says he queried the dates of a council tax bill and the Council issued a summons a day after it replied. Mr X continues to dispute the dates and wants a refund of the overpaid council tax and the court costs.

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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• 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 information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and the council tax regulations. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X is a landlord. His tenants told the Council their tenancy ended on 30 April. The Council closed their council tax account from 29 April. In May the Council issued a bill to Mr X from 30 April. Mr X immediately sent an email asking for a correct bill from 1 to 9 May as that was when the property was empty.
5. Mr X did not pay the council tax as billed in May. The Council sent a reminder in June and Mr X paid £10 in July. Mr X has described this as a token goodwill payment. On 15 July Council told Mr X it closed the tenants’ account from 29 April. It said his payment meant he now owed £76 which he needed to pay immediately to prevent further action.
6. Mr X did not bring the account up to date in accordance with the reminder, so the Council issued a summons on 1 August. The summons asked Mr X to pay £76 in council tax and £65 for court costs. On 5 August Mr X paid £77.
7. In response to his complaint the Council explained the council tax liability ended on 29 April because the tenants were not liable for the day of vacation. The Council said the summons and costs were correct because Mr X had not paid the full council tax by 1 August.
8. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. People must pay their council tax as billed; if they do not pay the law allows councils to take recovery action. The requirement to pay remains even when someone is disputing the bill. Mr X could have paid, as billed, and the Council would have adjusted the bill if the dates were wrong. The legislation states that liability is based on the position at the end of the day so the Council was correct to close the tenants’ account from 29 April. This is because they were not in residence at the end of the day on 30 April.
9. Mr X did not bring the account up to date as requested in the reminder so there is no suggestion of fault in the Council’s decision to serve a summons; costs are incurred as soon as a council issues a summons. Further, the Council’s response of 15 July warned Mr X it would take further action if he did not pay £76 immediately.
10. Mr X continues to dispute the dates and says he is only liable from 1 May. Even if there was any suggestion of fault regarding the dates (and I am not saying there is) a dispute about one day of council tax is not a degree of injustice which requires an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman