Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax. This is because the main complaint is late and there are no good reasons for this. We will not investigate more recent matters because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has unfairly pursued him for a council tax account for which he was jointly liable and took recovery action at his mother’s address causing her distress.
2. He also says that within six weeks of the Council’s complaint response removing a summons and costs it unfairly issued a further summons.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)).

4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council in March 2025 about the matters in paragraph 1.
7. The Council replied in May 2025 Mr X had not provided a forwarding address when he moved in 2022. It had traced him to his mother’s address.
8. The Council said it had taken the same recovery action for the jointly liable party. As they were jointly and severally liable this meant the Council could pursue both parties or one for the entire outstanding amount. The Council had explained this to Mr X in January 2023 when it issued a final notice and in April 2023. It then issued a summons and obtained a liability order. It referred the debt to its enforcement agent in 2024.
9. The Council said it had no record of his contacting it after April 2023. The Council noted Mr X offered to pay half of the debt, but it said the full amount was due. As a gesture of goodwill, the Council removed the summons and the costs and recalled the account from its agents. However, it said it would continue to pursue both parties for the remaining balance.
10. Mr X says six weeks after the Council’s reply it issued a further summons. He says this is unfair and does not believe the Council is pursuing the joint tenant.
11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he was aware of the outstanding jointly liable debt, and the reasons his mother’s address was used in January 2023. His complaint regarding this matter is late as he was aware of this more than 12 months ago, and there are no good reasons for it being late.
12. We will not investigate more recent matters from late 2024 because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation. The Council explained the reasons for the debt and its recovery action. While it could not share personal information about the joint tenant, it confirmed it had taken the same steps with both parties. It removed the summons and costs but said it would pursue both parties for the remaining balance. There is no evidence of fault here.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as it is late and there are no good reasons for this. There is not enough evidence of fault in more recent matters to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman