Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s council tax. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation. We cannot investigate court proceedings or matters that have been appealed.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council was wrong to send a reminder and then seek a liability order for council tax because he had paid the amount due. He also says
• the Council’s liability order evidence provided in court was incomplete
• the named liable parties were incorrect.
• The Council unfairly refused his discretionary council tax reduction claim.
• The Council failed to respond properly to his subject access request.

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, (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).
3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended).
4. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916).
5. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained to the Council regarding the matters in paragraph 1.
8. The Council replied that Mr X had not provided evidence of his income to support a discretionary reduction application. It directed him to information on its website about how to claim. The Council explained it had set up a payment plan. Mr X had made a payment but it was not in accordance with the instalments and so it sent a reminder. The Council offered to withdraw the reminder if he paid the outstanding instalments. The Council later issued a summons as Mr X did not make the required payments.
9. Mr X has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal regarding the Council’s decision. Mr X has also applied to the court to set aside the liability order.
10. We will not investigation this complaint because
• There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council regarding the reminder to warrant investigation. Mr X does not appear to have paid the correct instalments.
• There is not enough evidence of fault regarding the Council’s consideration of a discretionary reduction. The Council explained it had not received information it required.
• We cannot investigate the summons and liability order hearing as these are court proceedings as set out in paragraph 3.
• We cannot investigate the Council’s decision on council tax liability because Mr X has used his right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.
• We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint regarding the Council response to his subject access request. This is because it is reasonable to expect him to refer to the Information Commissioner’s office.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation. We cannot investigate court proceedings. Mr X has used his right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal regarding liability.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman