Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Miss X’s council tax account. This is because the Council’s actions did not cause Miss X significant enough injustice to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to properly manage her council tax account and to place a hold on recovery action by its enforcement agents (bailiffs). She says the bailiffs unnecessarily visited her property and says this caused stress and inconvenience.

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 Miss X and the Council.
4. I have considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council recognises it failed to put a hold on enforcement action when it told Miss X it would. It has apologised for the inconvenience and distressed caused but Miss X remains unhappy and wants the Council to pay her compensation.
6. We do not investigate all the complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
7. I appreciate the Council’s handling of the case and its unnecessary enforcement action caused Miss X some distress and inconvenience, but I do not consider her injustice is significant enough to warrant further investigation or a remedy.
8. Miss X is the landlord of the property concerned in this case rather than the occupier. She became aware of the bailiff’s visit when attending the property as she found letters relating to it, but she was not there when they attended. While it is clear this would have caused some impact, it is not the same as if she had been living there at the time of the visit.
9. When Miss X became aware of the outstanding council tax owed, she acted quickly to resolve the matter with the Council and provided a forwarding address for future correspondence. The matter is now resolved as the Council has updated the period of her liability and Miss X has paid the amount owed.
10. I understand Miss X had credit on her account and asked the Council to refund this as part of her complaint. The Council has advised Miss X how to claim the credit back and we do not therefore need to investigate this point further.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman