Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of council tax for Mr X’s two properties. This is because the Council has provided suitable remedies for its faults. Mr X can appeal to a tribunal regarding the premium the Council added.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council unfairly pursued council tax recovery for two properties he owns. He says the Council admitted it was at fault, but it failed to respond properly to his complaint. He also says the He complained the Council’s enforcement agent acted aggressively and the Council was wrong to add an empty homes premium to a property.

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:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended).
4. 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).
5. 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

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. At stage one the Council said Mr X had not paid the monthly instalments for each property. It sent reminder notices, and then a summons. The Council noted an officer advised Mr X to pay three missed instalments and it would reset the payment plan. However, the officer did not advise Mr X another payment was also now due, and the summons costs of £115. The Council sent Mr X a revised payment plan starting in October.
9. Mr X paid three missed instalments but did not pay the September instalment or the revised instalment as advised in October. The Council sent a warning of enforcement letter. Mr X did not respond so it passed the account to its enforcement agent. Mr X paid the agent in full for one property and part of the amount due for the other.
10. In recognition of its fault in not advising about the further missed instalment, the Council recalled the enforcement agent and removed the costs of £310.
11. Mr X complained at stage two the incorrect information led to higher instalments, an agent’s visit and fees, causing distress. He also said the Council’s agent was aggressive and blocked his drive. He said the Council was wrong to charge an empty property premium for one property. He asked for compensation.
12. The Council delayed responding to Mr X’s complaint for five months. It apologised and offered £100 as a remedy. However, it did not agree to pay a further financial remedy for its fault in giving the wrong advice. It said that the reason for the recovery action was that Mr X did not pay the instalment due in October and failed to respond to its warning of enforcement. It said Mr X could complain to the enforcement agent directly. It gave Mr X information about pursuing his request for an exception to the empty home premium.
13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has taken appropriate action by removing the enforcement agent fees and recalling the account. The Council has also offered a suitable remedy for its complaint response delay. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and we cannot achieve the financial remedy Mr X is seeking.
14. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if he disagrees with the Council’s decision on the empty homes premium.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has taken suitable action, and he can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal regarding the premium.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman