Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a visit the Council made to Ms X’s home in relation to her council tax account. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to provide a worthwhile outcome for Ms X.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council sent a council officer to her home unnecessarily. She also complained the Council held the email address of her deceased relative on record as her own.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(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 Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X complained the Council sent an officer to her home to check whether she was fraudulently collecting the single person council tax discount. She informed the Council a relative was living with her prior to this, so she was unhappy with the Council’s actions. She said she felt discriminated against and she also complained the Council referred to the email address of her deceased relative as hers, when she did not supply this information.
6. The Council said it received information indicating a relative came to live with Ms X earlier than the date she provided, and she did not respond to missed calls and an email inviting her to provide further information. The Council’s has confirmed its records showed the deceased relative’s email address as belonging to Ms X.
7. Ms X wants us to find the Council at fault. The evidence shows the Council sent an officer to Ms X’s home despite having received notification from her that the relative was living with her. This would likely have been upsetting for Ms X. However, the Council has explained it took this action after taking steps to contact her to clarify the situation. There is no evidence of discrimination in the Council’s actions. I therefore stop short of calling this fault. The Council has accepted Ms X is not abusing the single person discount. Further investigation would not lead to a worthwhile outcome for Ms X.
8. Ms X is unhappy with the Council referring to her deceased relative’s email address. It would be reasonable for her to refer this part of the complaint to the Information Commissioner Officer (ICO) as this relates to the handling of personal data.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because an investigation would be unlikely to provide a worthwhile outcome for her.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman