Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax enforcement action. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation and the injustice due to the Council’s delay in responding to Mr X’s complaint is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council was wrong to take enforcement action for council tax arrears because he was not liable. The Council should apply an exemption. He also said:
• The Council failed to properly communicate with him.
• the Council’s enforcement agent sent a further letter after the Council said it had stopped recovery action.
• The Council delayed replying to his complaint.
• This caused him and his family distress and anxiety.

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 injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (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 the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X complained to the Council regarding the matters in paragraph 1.
5. The Council replied:
• Mr X did not complete two exemption forms it sent him in 2020. The account then progressed to recovery action.
• It had had now used its discretion to apply the exemption without the form and evidence it usually required. This led to a refund which it had issued.
• The enforcement agent had already sent the letter that Mr X received before the Council withdrew the recovery action.
• There was delay in its response to Mr X’s stage one complaint. The Council apologised for this and said it had reviewed its processes.
6. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation. The Council explained Mr X did not return the exemption forms it sent. The enforcement agent had already sent letters to Mr X before the Council stopped the action and recalled the account.
7. There was delay by the Council in responding to Mr X’s stage one complaint. The Council took 25 working days when it should respond in 20 working days. We will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint because the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is either not enough evidence of fault or the injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman