Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s council tax. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation. The Council has provided a suitable remedy for its complaint response delay.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has failed to record council tax payments she made and then unfairly issued summonses and obtained two liability orders. It then progressed recovery unfairly in her view. She says the Council continued to seek a liability order in court when she attended. She says this caused her distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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 (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).
4. 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).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complained to the Council regarding the matters in paragraph 1.
7. The Council replied to Ms X’s complaint in September and December 2025. It explained the reasons for the summons and liability orders it issued. It said that Ms X had not paid earlier years and so payments were allocated to these years. It set out details of the payments it received. The Council said it had recalled the account from its enforcement agent in July 2025 and offered a payment arrangement. However, Ms X had not paid in accordance with this and so it had passed the account back to its agents. The Council did not consider it had acted with fault regarding its recovery action.
8. However, the Council accepted that it had delayed responding to Ms X’s complaint in June 2025 until late September 2025. It apologised for this and offered £50 for the delay.
9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint regarding the summons and liability order hearings. This is because we cannot investigate court proceedings as I explain in paragraph 2 as the law does not allow it.
10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint regarding the Council’s handling of her council tax account including the payments she made, the Council’s allocation of payments and the recovery action it took. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation. The Council has responded regarding the account transactions and the actions it took.
11. We will not investigation the Council’s delay in responding to Ms X’s stage one complaint because the Council has taken suitable action by apologising and offering a proportionate financial remedy to remedy the injustice here.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we cannot investigate court proceedings. In other matters there is not enough evidence of fault or significant outstanding injustice to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman