Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council managed council tax payments and arrears. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, says the Council did not allocate council tax payments correctly and did not follow the correct process regarding recovery action. Mr X wants the Council to review its procedures, refund the costs, and pay compensation.

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. (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. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. In February 2023 the Council issued a reminder for council tax arrears of £129. The reminder said the Council would issue a court summons if Mr X did not pay the reminder in seven days.
5. The Council issued the council tax bill for 2023/24; payment of £143 was required by 5 April. Mr X paid £145 on 3 April. The Council used it to pay the April instalment and allocated the balance to the 2022/23 arrears. Mr X had intended the payment to be used for the arrears.
6. On 1 September the Council served a summons for the arrears. Mr X received the summons on 29 September. On 22 September the court issued a liability order for council tax of £127 and £100 in costs.
7. A liability order allows councils to use bailiffs to collect council tax. The Council passed the debt to bailiffs on 29 September. The bailiffs wrote to Mr X asking him to pay the arrears and costs; the bailiffs did not add fees. Mr X paid £127 to the Council but he did not pay the costs. Bailiff action continued because Mr X had not paid the costs; the bailiffs charged bailiff fees because they took additional action to recover the court costs. Mr X paid the debt in full.
8. In response to Mr X’s complaint the Council said it allocates payments to the current year if they match, or nearly match, the amount stated on the bill. It said that if it had used the April payment for the arrears, then Mr X would have been in arrears for 2023/24. The Council said it correctly issued the summons because Mr X had not paid the 2022/23 arrears and the bailiffs correctly added fees because Mr X only paid the council tax and not the court costs. The Council said it had followed the correct process but it waived £40 in costs.
9. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The April payment closely matched the April instalment, so the Council correctly allocated it to 2023/24. Mr X would have needed to say he wanted to use the payment for the arrears.
10. Mr X did not pay the arrears following the reminder. The law allows councils to issue a summons for an unpaid reminder and costs are incurred when a summons is issued. The liability order includes court costs which must be paid in addition to the council tax. I do not know why Mr X did get the summons until late September, but this is more likely to be due to postal delays than Council error.
11. The law allowed the Council to involve bailiffs and Mr X had a chance to pay the arrears and costs before incurring bailiff fees. But, because he paid the council tax but not the costs, the bailiffs correctly took further action which incurred additional fees.
12. I have considered all the events since the Council issued the reminder and there is nothing to suggest fault or anything requiring an investigation. In addition, there is nothing to indicate the Council should pay compensation.
13. Mr X also complained about the Council’s complaint handling. It did take a few weeks for the Council to issue the final complaint reply but it did respond and waived £40 in costs. This is not an issue which requires an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman