Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax matters. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to send him a reminder via its ebilling process. He then received a summons with costs of £93 added. He says this caused him stress and he requests a refund of the costs.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(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 Mr X. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X complained the Council sent him a summons in April 2025 adding costs of £64.50. He said did not receive a reminder the Council said it sent, and it should have sent a final notice.
5. The Council replied Mr X had not paid the first instalment due on 1 April. It sent him a reminder on 17 April. As he did not pay, after a further seven days the full annual council tax became due, and it took court action. The Council said it could send up to two reminders a year, but each reminder must be paid in full. It said it had issued the summons correctly and would not remove the costs.
6. Mr X complained further the Council told him it issued a reminder email via ebilling, but now it said it sent it by post. He did not expect delivery by post. He did not have an opportunity to make payment before court action and he thought it was disproportionate to send a summons after one missed payment. He asked the Council to remove the costs, which were now £93 including the liability order.
7. The Council said it could not find evidence it said it sent a reminder by email. It said Mr X’s online account was not live on 17 April and it sent the reminder by post. It deemed it had served this correctly. His online account was live from 31 May. It said that Mr X was aware of the charge because he received its March bill.
8. I do not consider there is sufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman