Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s council tax recovery action. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council. The Council has taken satisfactory action because it has removed costs and fees charged.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council’s enforcement agent pursued payment of full council tax arrears for an old address when his joint tenant had already paid half. He felt forced into paying in full. He said a Council officer was rude and unhelpful when he called and the Council delayed refunding him. This was at a time when he was going through very difficult personal circumstances and so it had a severe impact on his finances and 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 or fault causing a significant injustice, to justify investigating (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained to the Council about the matters in paragraph 1.
6. The Council replied that Mr X’s joint tenant had paid the Council half the outstanding arrears after it had passed the account to its enforcement agent. The joint tenant should have paid the agent or contacted the Council or the agent. Therefore, the agent was not aware it should reduce the amount it was pursuing.
7. The Council also said
• It listened to the telephone call Mr X made and there was no fault in the officer’s attitude or advice.
• Refunds could take up to a month. It apologised if officers said refunds would be made more quickly. The refund had now been paid.
• It had sent the required council tax notices and reminders to Mr X’s previous address because he had not advised it of his forwarding address.
• It understood Mr X felt the need to pay in full before he found that half the arrears had been paid. In acknowledgement of this and Mr X’s personal circumstances the Council refunded the agent’s fees of £310 and also the summons costs of £116.
8. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in the way it handled matters. The Council and its agent were not alerted to the payment the joint tenant made. The Council sent the correct notification letters to Mr X. The costs and fees were also correct. However, the Council has considered the payment made and Mr X’s personal circumstances and removed costs and fees, and refunded them. We consider this a suitable action and would not seek a further remedy.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation. The Council has taken suitable action in the circumstances.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman