Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue him a payment card. This is mostly because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council refusing to issue him a payment card to pay his council tax. He says he needs this card for budgeting and mental health reasons. He says the Council’s decision has affected his mental health.

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, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X.
5. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and the Council’s council tax payment policy.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council’s council tax payment policy directs users to pay their council tax by direct debit, online or telephone payments. It says the Council may issue a payment card only in exceptional circumstances where someone cannot use these alternative payment methods. This is because the payment card costs the Council more than other payment methods.
7. The evidence I have seen shows:
• the Council initially told Mr X wrongly that it no longer issued payment cards; and
• there was a delay in responding to Mr X’s request for a payment card.
8. The Council apologised to Mr X for giving wrong information and then considered whether he was eligible for a payment card. It also adjusted his council tax payment plan to account for the delay. I consider these actions reasonable and proportionate to put right any injustice caused. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable by us investigating this point.
9. When assessing Mr X’s request, the Council recognised his mental health concerns but decided he did not meet the threshold for a payment card. It noted that he used alternative payment methods for other important bills, which it said suggested he could use the same methods to pay his council tax.
10. There is no legal requirement for councils to offer particular payment methods. Each council can decide which methods it accepts and when to make adjustments for someone’s circumstances. I am satisfied the Council considered Mr X’s request and made a decision it was entitled to reach. I have not seen evidence of fault in how the Council reached that decision. So, while Mr X disagrees with the decision, that does not mean we can criticise the decision.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council took appropriate action to remedy any injustice caused by delay or incorrect information, and there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making about the payment card.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman