Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault or significant injustice by the Council to warrant investigation. Ms X can appeal to a tribunal regarding council tax liability and council tax support.

The complaint

1. Ms X’s representative, Ms B, complains the Council unfairly pursued legal action against Ms X for council tax arrears. She says the Council
• did not follow the correct process as it did not send a reminder or final notice before a summons.
• sent bills via ebilling without Ms X’s consent. She had no access to the account.
• revenues and benefits teams’ actions were contradictory leading to a gap in council tax support.
• cancelled a council tax payment arrangement in error and then applied for deductions from her benefit.
• failed to consider Ms X’s vulnerability.

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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement,

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

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms B complained to the Council regarding the matters in paragraph 1.
7. The Council replied it had followed the correct process. It said Ms X had registered for council tax online, which was later converted to ebilling. The Council advised that Ms X’s ebilling account was removed after a period, but it sent an email reminder before the summons. It sent a copy of this.
8. The Council explained Ms X had an overlap in her tenancies so she was liable for council tax, but not entitled to council tax support because she was not resident.
9. The Council accepted it had cancelled an arrangement to pay £20 per month in error. It had then applied for deductions of £16 per month from Ms X’s benefits.
10. The Council acknowledged there was some uncertainty about the period Ms X was on ebilling. In view of this and to assist Ms X it removed the summons costs of £75.
11. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation of its actions regarding the summons process. The Council has in any case removed the summons costs to recognise uncertainty about ebilling and to assist Ms X. While there was fault by the Council in cancelling the arrangement, it was replaced with a lower repayment figure and so this did not cause significant injustice to Ms X.
12. We will not investigate the Council’s liability period and council tax support decisions because it is reasonable to expect Ms X to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if she disagrees.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault or injustice by the Council to warrant investigation. Ms X can appeal to the Tribunal if she disagrees with the Council’s liability and council tax support decisions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman