Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr Y’s council tax account because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains about the Council’s handling of his council tax account. He says the Council incorrectly pursued enforcement action against him.
2. Mr Y also says the Council breached the Equality Act 2010 and failed to provide reasonable adjustments.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Magistrates’ Court issued a summons to Mr Y in September 2025 for non-payment of Council Tax. In October 2025, the Magistrates’ Court granted a liability order. The Council told Mr Y about this, advising him to pay the outstanding amount. It said it would otherwise pass the debt to enforcement agents which it has a right to do.
7. Mr Y complained to the Council in November 2025, asking it to provide a certified copy of the liability order. The Council explained to Mr Y that he would need to contact the Magistrates’ Court to obtain this.
8. Mr Y says the Council incorrectly pursued enforcement action against him, but I have seen evidence that suggests the Council followed the correct statutory process. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.
9. The Council advised Mr Y on how to apply for council tax reduction and Mr Y applied for this. The Council awarded him discretionary council tax reduction. The Council removed the liability order and associated costs from Mr Y’s account because of this. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome or achieve anything more than this and so we will not investigate.
10. Mr Y says the Council breached the Equality Act 2010, failing to provide reasonable adjustments. The Council says it considered Mr Y’s vulnerabilities in line with its policy.
11. Organisations will often be able to show they have properly taken account of the Equality Act if they have considered the impact their decisions will have on the individuals affected and these decisions can be challenged, reviewed or appealed. The records show the Council considered Mr Y’s needs and properly told him about his rights of review and appeal as well as how to apply for a reduction in council tax. It is unlikely an investigation would find fault with the Council and so we will not investigate this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman. There is also no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman