Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about deductions from benefits for council tax arrears. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation and most of Miss X’s complaint is not within our jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. Miss X says the Council failed to follow the correct process when making deductions from her universal credit for council tax arrears. She says the Council has not explained the reason for the arrears and the deductions caused her financial hardship. She also says the Council breached data protection rules and that it delayed responding to her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended).
3. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So, where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
4. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In April 2025 Miss X complained about deductions from her Universal Credit for council tax arrears. She said the Council had not notified her or explained the reason for the arrears. She asked the Council to suspend the deductions as they were causing her hardship.
7. The Council explained it had issued a summons and obtained a liability order in September 2023 for £549. Miss X had offered to pay £20 per month and the Council agreed an arrangement. But she had stopped paying in March 2024. It then sought recovery via deductions from her benefits.
8. Miss X complained further that she
• had not agreed a payment plan for arrears, but for the current year.
• required a breakdown of debt, a copy of the liability order, and all notifications.
• had asked for email or online communication.
• questioned how the Council obtained her address. It was a data breach.
9. The Council replied
• It had sent a letter about the agreed payment arrangement by post and email.
• It sent a statement, details of the liability order, and a summons copy was online.
• there was no data breach as the Department of Work and Pensions is required to share data with local authorities for benefit claims.
• agreed there was delay in responding to her service enquiries.
10. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council before the issue of the summons as it appears it followed the correct administrative procedures. We cannot consider the summons or liability order as this is part of court proceedings as set out in paragraph 2. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to complain to the Information Commissioner about claimed data breaches. We will not investigate the Council’s delay in responding to Miss X’s enquiries and complaint as it is not good use of our resources as we are not investigating the substantive matters.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault. We cannot investigate court matters and there is another body that is better placed to consider data breaches.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman