Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's management of Mr X’s council tax account as it is unlikely we will find that Mr X was caused a significant injustice from any Council fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council wrongly demanded around £2,000 in council tax from him. Mr X complains the Council was unable to provide him with a simple statement which showed the council tax payments he had made over the preceding few years and that it issued him with a summons. Mr X says he spent many hours fighting his position and that he now requires compensation from the Council for this.

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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained (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 the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Background

5. In May 2024, due to adjustments on Mr X's council tax account regarding single person discount eligibility, the Council sent Mr X bills for amounts that had become due.
6. In response, Mr X contacted the Council to say he could not comprehend the bills and to send a cheque payment for what he considered he was obliged to pay. There followed an exchange of contact between Mr X and the Council and in October 2024, Mr X told the Council he had cancelled his council tax direct debit and asked it to send him a statement detailing all the council tax payments he had made since 2020.
7. A further exchange followed between Mr X and the Council, with Mr X having to ask several times for a clear statement showing the payments he had made. This was provided by the Council in January 2024.
8. The Council also sent Mr X a summons in January 2024 for council tax that was owed but on the same day Mr X received it, the Council advised it was withdrawing it in acknowledgement of there being outstanding correspondence with the council tax department.
9. On receipt of the statement of his account in January 2024, Mr X acknowledged it was correct but requested a written apology for how the Council had dealt with the matter and for sending him the summons. Mr X also requested compensation for the hours he said he had wasted dealing with this issue.
10. In February 2024, the Council's Chief Executive wrote to Mr X apologising for the delay in providing the information he had requested and for the way the Council had handled the matter. The Council though declined to make Mr X a compensation payment.
11. Mr X complained to us saying that without his intervention, the Council would have forced him to overpay around £2000 in council tax. Mr X said he wanted compensation for the time he had spent on the matter and the stress he had experienced.

Back to top

My assessment

12. The Council had previously warned Mr X that it would take recovery action if he continued to choose to withhold payments. While Mr X disputed the account, it was still incumbent upon him to continue to make payments as demanded by the Council and when he did not, the Council was entitled to take recovery action. That the Council issued a summons in this case therefore may not necessarily have been fault by it. Notwithstanding this, the Council withdrew the summons on the day it was received by Mr X. While I appreciate that Mr X remains unhappy, I do not consider there is sufficient outstanding injustice arising from this to justify our further involvement.
13. The Council acknowledged that it should have provided Mr X with a clearer breakdown of his account sooner and apologised for this. While there was some delay, and I recognise that Mr X was put to some time and trouble to obtain the information he requested, this does not constitute a level of injustice that I consider would warrant the Council making a financial payment to Mr X.
14. Mr X says but for his intervention he would have been forced to pay an extra £2000 in council tax. It is not clear on what basis Mr X says this. When a breakdown of the account was provided, including payments made, Mr X confirmed it was correct. Even if the Council had demanded an incorrect amount, this payment was not taken and so Mr X was not financially disadvantaged by this. Again, I do not consider that any fault by the Council in this regard led to any serious loss or harm to Mr X.
15. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we will find that Mr X was caused a significant injustice from any Council fault

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman