Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council dealt with his Council Tax account. We have found the Council at fault in failing to reply to Mr X’s correspondence and delay in responding to his complaint. The Council agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Mr X.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the way the Council dealt with his Council Tax account. In particular, Mr X says there was unreasonable delay in responding to his correspondence and his subsequent complaint.
2. Mr X says because of the Council’s fault he has suffered avoidable distress and inconvenience.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
6. The Valuation Tribunal (the tribunal) deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
7. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. I have investigated the period from the start of 2023 to 24 April 2025 which is the date of the Council’s final complaint response to Mr X. I have investigated Mr X’s 2023 correspondence as he continued to pursue this with the Council but did not receive a response until December 2024.
9. I have not investigated more recent events as Mr X would need to make a complaint to the Council in the first instance.
10. I have not investigated any issues of liability for council tax. The tribunal is an independent expert body. The Council must do what the tribunal tells it to. Mr X and/or his tenants would have had a right to appeal to the tribunal and I consider it would have been reasonable to use this right.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
12. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

13. The following is a summary of key events. It does not include everything that happened.

Mr X’s complaint to the Council

14. Mr X emailed the Council on 1 November 2024 about the way it had dealt with his council tax account. Mr X highlighted a failure to reply to his emails and being sent letters addressed to previous tenants despite advising they had left and returning correspondence as directed. Mr X said he had received a further two such letters that day. Mr X also referred to a previous issue when he had to intervene when his tenants were being threatened despite not being liable as students and when he was threatened with legal action due to failure to respond to his email which could have avoided the issue. Mr X said he was still receiving letters for named tenants that had left the address years ago despite the Council being advised at the time. Mr X made a formal complaint via the Council’s Mayor and his MP on 5 November 2024 which enclosed his email of 1 November.
15. The Council provided a response to Mr X’s complaint at Stage 1 of its complaint procedure on 2 December 2024. The Council apologised for not responding to several emails sent in early 2024 about his previous tenants leaving the property. The Council explained it had a large backlog of correspondence. The wording is unclear in places but it appears the Council noted that Mr X had returned a bill for the previous tenants and advised they had left the property and the account had been closed and an account opened in his name with an empty property discount granted for the period 27 January 2024 to 26 February 2024 (in accordance with the Council’s policy of providing a one month discount). The Council understood Mr X had now moved into the property and sought confirmation he was the only resident aged over 18 years old. The Council provided an assurance that summonses received at the property about his tenants did not affect Mr X’s personal credit rating and that the records had been updated so no further correspondence would be sent. The Council confirmed Mr X’s current account balance and sent a revised bill. The Council upheld Mr X’s complaint but noted the summons was withdrawn with no further action for his tenants and the Council was unable to offer Mr X compensation.
16. Mr X escalated his complaint on 17 January 2025 as he considered the Council’s apology was inadequate. Mr X noted the Council’s response contained incorrect dates about some of his earlier emails and the wording was unclear. Mr X also complained about the Council’s failure to reply to emails he sent in May, October and November 2023. Mr X noted it had taken 19 months to obtain a response.
17. Mr X sent a reminder to the Council on 25 February 2025 about his escalation request. The Council acknowledged Mr X’s request on 6 March although it referred to a review request of 3 March which appears to be incorrect. The Council confirmed it would provide a response by 24 March 2025.
18. Mr X sent a reminder to the Council on 31 March 2025 as he had not received a reply. Mr X also complained to the Ombudsman at the beginning of April 2025 as he had not received a reply. The Council confirmed the matter was being considered at Stage 2 of its complaint procedure.
19. The Council provided a response to Mr X at Stage 2 on 24 April 2025. The Council partly upheld Mr X’s complaint. The Council had found emails from before 2024 that had not received a reply and provided an apology. The Council had determined his tenants were liable following his emails and notified them directly. The Council acknowledged a payment of £1,500 to the council tax account on 19 January 2025. The Council had also located a closed account in Mr X’s name dated 1 March 2015 to 31 July 2022 for the same property which had a credit of £287.15. This had now been transferred to Mr X’s current council tax account. The Council had not written off any debt. The Council accepted Mr X had sent several emails about the issues and received documents at his address after moving back in for previous tenants but noted this did not affect his credit rating at this address. The Council acknowledged there had been delay in responding to his emails and complaint and offered £100 for his time and trouble.
20. Mr X brought his complaint back to the Ombudsman in May 2025.

Council response

21. In its response to the Ombudsman, the Council has provided a copy of Mr X’s correspondence.
22. The Council has acknowledged that emails Mr X sent in May 2023 were not actioned and no reply was provided to Mr X. These were an email about correspondence his tenants had received about outstanding council tax and a follow up email about the same issue. Mr X was concerned his tenants were being wrongly held liable and also about any ‘black mark’ against the property itself.
23. The Council also acknowledged that it did not reply to an email from Mr X in October 2023. This was to advise the Council that his tenants had left the property and new tenants had moved in.
24. The Council also acknowledged it did not reply to a further email from Mr X in October 2023 to confirm the above amendment had been made. This email provided details of Mr X’s new tenants and that they were responsible for council tax from 23 September as the previous tenants had left the property on 22 September. Mr X asked for confirmation to be sent to him. Although the Council did not provide a response to Mr X it acted on his information by making the new tenants liable.
25. Mr X also sent two emails in November 2023 which did not receive a response. The first was about threatening letters being sent to his property which was concerning to his new tenants. Mr X noted the Council had resolved an earlier issue that year and the previous year about his previous tenants but that the matter appeared to be a recurring issue due to the Council not updating its records. Mr X noted he had not received a response to his notifications in October despite his request for confirmation at the time. Mr X sent a further email in November chasing a reply.
26. Mr X sent an email in February 2024. This noted his most recent tenants had left the property on 26 January and the property was currently vacant owing to remedial works being required. Mr X explained he had found an opened letter to his tenants from the Council seeking payment of outstanding council tax. Mr X highlighted he had still not received a response to his previous emails about his tenants and offered to provide information if there was an outstanding debt. Mr X also sent follow up emails about this issue in February and March as he wanted to ensure there was no impact on his credit rating if an amount was owed by his previous tenants. Mr X noted if he did not receive a reply the next day he would assume there was no council tax requirement and he would consider the matter closed. Mr X subsequently returned a council tax bill dated 4 March 2024 addressed to him at the property to the Council for the period 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025.
27. The Council did not provide a reply to Mr X and the emails were not considered until Mr X’s subsequent complaint in November 2024.
28. Mr X returned a council tax letter addressed to his previous tenants at his address dated 18 September 2024 setting out that the debt had been passed to the debt recovery team with the potential for the matter to be taken to court and passed to bailiffs for collection. Mr X also returned a council tax reminder addressed to his previous tenants at his address.
29. The Council has explained its council tax service had a significant backlog of outstanding correspondence in December 2022. The Council used an external contractor until May 2023 to help with this backlog. The Council has confirmed that from 2025 it has reduced the backlog of outstanding correspondence and is now answering incoming correspondence within 5 days with the performance target being 10 working days. The Council notes it is regrettable that it could not achieve this earlier and provide a better service to Mr X. The Council will also remind staff that when an account holder requests confirmation of action taken, a reply must be sent.
30. I have also considered Mr X’s records of his contact with the Council during the period of my investigation from 2023 to 24 April 2025. This corresponds with the chronology set out above.

My analysis

31. The Council has accepted that it repeatedly failed to respond to correspondence from Mr X over an extended period. This is fault. There was also a considerable delay in the Council responding to Mr X’s complaint. This is fault.
32. I am satisfied the above fault will have caused Mr X avoidable distress and time and trouble. In the circumstances of this complaint, I do not consider the sum previously offered by the Council of £100 is sufficient.

Back to top

Action

33. The Council will take the following action within one month of my final decision to provide a suitable remedy to Mr X:
1. apologise to Mr X for the failure to respond to his correspondence and delay in dealing with his complaint;
2. make a symbolic payment to Mr X of £350 (less £100 if this amount has already been paid directly to Mr X ) to acknowledge his distress and time and trouble; and
3. provide the Ombudsman with a copy of the reminder issued to staff that when a council tax account holder requests confirmation of action taken a reply must be sent.
34. Where we recommend a symbolic financial payment (e.g. for distress) we have set the amount to appropriately reflect the scale of injustice. That payment should not be offset against any debts.
35. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
36. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

37. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman