Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about council tax and enforcement. This is because we cannot investigate matters related to the start of court action. Also, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and there is another body better placed to consider his complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to follow the statutory process to recover historical council tax. He says the Council’s own records show it issued bills but did not send reminders or final notices, and it now seeks to enforce recovery for those years. He also says the Council misled him and failed to include court-related correspondence in response to his Subject Access Request (SAR). Mr X says this has caused him significant distress, anxiety and uncertainty due to enforcement action that he believes should not have occurred. He wants the Council to apologise, provide a financial remedy for the injustice caused, review its procedures for record-keeping and handling SAR’s.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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 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.
6. 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
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mr X previously complained to the Ombudsman about how the Council dealt with his council tax account. We will not consider the same issues again as part of this complaint. I have considered the new issues Mr X has raised.
10. Mr X complained the Council tried to enforce historical council tax liability and failed to respond to his request to adjourn his hearing, which he says the court sent to it. However, the courts are responsible for deciding such matters. We cannot investigate complaints about court proceedings.
11. Mr X complained the Council originally failed to get a Liability Order to recover historical council tax. The Council explained to Mr X he remained liable and it would take the steps to obtain a Liability Order, which it subsequently did in October 2025. I am satisfied the Council followed the correct procedures and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. It would have been reasonable for Mr X to have appealed to the Valuation Tribunal if he did not agree he was liable for the council tax.
12. Mr X complained the Council did not disclose the correspondence from the court in response to his SAR. Concerns about how an organisation has handled a SAR fall within the remit of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). This is the appropriate body to consider complaints about these matters.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we cannot investigate matters related to the start of court action. Also, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and there is another body better placed to consider his complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman