Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council processed changes to the complainant’s council tax. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice. We will not investigate the complaint about an alleged data breach because the complainant can contact the Information Commissioner.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, says the Council wrongly issued a council tax bill and took 28 months to amend the council tax records. She also complains the Council breached the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) by holding incorrect records about her. Ms X wants £1000 compensation and for the Council to improve its procedures.

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.

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

3. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X sold a property in October 2022. She reported the sale to the Council in December 2024. The Council delayed processing her report and issued a reminder in February. Ms X repeated she had sold the property and, a few days later, the Council ended her council tax liability.
6. The Council had issued a bill to Ms X in November 2024 because the tenant moved out and the Council did not know Ms X had sold the property in 2022. For this reason, it held Ms X liable for the council tax from November. Ms X did not make any council tax payments and the Council did not take recovery action or charge any costs.
7. Ms X complained the Council delayed processing the change of ownership and says the Council should have received updates from the land registry. She also says the Council breached the GDPR.
8. In response to her complaint, the Council explained it did not know until December 2024 that she had sold the property. It apologised for the delay in processing her December email. The Council explained it had nothing to suggest, until December, that Ms X was not the owner. The Council declined Ms X’s request for compensation.
9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council causing injustice. Ms X sold the property in 2022 and reported the sale in December 2024. The Council relies on information being disclosed by owners and occupiers and, in the absence of any reports of the sale, it did not know Ms X was no longer the owner. It is not the responsibility of the land registry to report sales to council tax teams and there would not be any reason for the Council to have contacted the land registry. The Council did not know Ms X had sold the property so there was no delay and it correctly made her liable in November based on the information it held.
10. There was a minor error by the Council because it did not process the email Ms X sent in December. This, however, did not cause an injustice requiring an investigation because the Council quickly ended Ms X’s liability after her second email. Ms X did not pay any council tax and the Council took no action other than sending a reminder.
11. I will not investigate the alleged data breach because Ms X can complain to the Information Commissioner. It is reasonable for her to do this because the Commissioner if the correct organisation to consider reports of data breaches.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice and because Ms X can complain to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman