Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her council tax account and the actions of its enforcement agents. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider a complaint about the Council’s handling of her personal data and its responses to her requests for information.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of her council tax account and the actions of its enforcement agents. She also complaints about how the Council has handled her personal data. She says matter has caused her distress and affected her health. She wants the Council to recall the debt from its enforcement agents, improve its oversight of their actions and provide a financial remedy for the distress caused.

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 another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. In its complaint responses, the Council said it had liability orders which allowed it to instruct its enforcement agent to recover the debt. It provided Ms X with copies of the liability orders. It advised her to contact the enforcement agent to arrange a repayment plan.
7. Ms X asked the Council to suspend the recovery action due to her vulnerability caused by health conditions. The Council asked its enforcement agent to pause recovery action whilst it considered her request. The Council considered evidence she provided to support her request, but did not consider it sufficient to stop the recovery action or recall the debt from its enforcement agents.
8. We will not investigate this complaint as there is insufficient evidence of fault. The Council has obtained liability orders which allows it to instruct enforcement agents to recover the debt. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s or its enforcement agent’s actions to warrant an investigation.
9. We will not investigate her complaint about the Council and its enforcement’s agent’s handling of her personal data and responses to her information requests. The Information Commissioner’s Office is the UK regulator for information rights and data protection and is better placed to consider a complaint about this.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider a complaint about information rights and data protection.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman