Summary: We will not investigate this council tax complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice. In addition, the complainant could have used her appeal rights if she disagreed with the outcome of her claim for council tax support.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains the Council threatened her with prison for council tax arrears and failed to respond to her questions. She says the Council failed to withdraw some court costs and dismissed her application for council tax support (CTS). Ms X wants 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, 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))

3. 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)
4. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on CTS.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. 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

6. For some years Ms X has been in discussions with the Council about how it issues liability orders. During 2024/25 Ms X accrued some council tax arrears. She says she always pays what she can and has never refused to pay. I have seen an extract from a letter to Ms X where the Council wrote, “in extreme cases this could even lead to committal proceedings or prison…”.
7. Ms X had a meeting with the Council and says it agreed to put matters on hold until it had addressed her questions. Ms X paid £1000 towards her arrears but the Council issued a summons and charged costs. Ms X says the Council withdrew the summons but not the costs. She also complains the Council did not address her concerns about being threatened with prison and it dismissed her application for CTS. Ms X wants compensation for the stress.
8. In response to the complaint the Council said it had not threated her with prison but had highlighted it as one possible consequence of council tax arrears. It confirmed it had withdrawn the summons but apologised for not withdrawing the costs. It put the account on hold for a month to allow time for it to remove the costs and issue a revised bill to show the payment Ms X had made towards the arrears.
9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice. The Council did not threaten Ms X with prison but correctly explained that prison can be a consequence of non-payment. Prison is one of the recovery options but is usually reserved for people who wilfully choose not to pay. The Council noted Ms X had not said she was refusing to pay and it highlighted that it had not obtained a liability order so no recovery action was possible. Councils usually consider prison as one of the final options and would not threaten it when the court had not issued a liability order. Further, the Council answered Ms X’s questions regarding this issue.
10. The Council did not withdraw the court costs. It has now withdrawn them and apologised. I appreciate this may have been stressful for Ms X but it has not caused an injustice requiring an investigation.
11. Ms X says the Council dismissed her claim for CTS. I will not investigate this part of the complaint because Ms X could have appealed to the Valuation Tribunal if she disagreed with the Council’s CTS decision.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice and because Ms X could have appealed to the tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman