Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to appropriately safeguard Ms X when it pursued her for unpaid council tax. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to appropriately safeguard her when she left her previous property due to domestic violence. She also said the Council committed a data breach when it shared details of her new accommodation and repeatedly forced her to reveal details of her domestic abuse.

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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complained the Council took enforcement action against her regarding unpaid council tax despite being made aware she left the property due to domestic violence. She also complained the Council disclosed the details of her new property to enforcement agents and caused her to have to repeatedly disclose details of the situation she was escaping.
7. The Council explained it was not made aware of the circumstances surrounding Ms X’s departure until she contacted the Council directly over a year later. As the debt on the account had accrued over several years, the Council pursued enforcement action as normal, which included passing her details to enforcement agents. The Council suspended enforcement action upon receiving contact with Ms X.
8. Ms X remains unhappy with the Council and wants us to find it at fault. The evidence shows the Council suspended enforcement action once Ms X contacted it. This is what we would expect it to do. It is understandable that Ms X did not contact the Council at the time she left the property, however this is not something we can hold the Council responsible for. There is no evidence of wrongdoing in how the Council has handled this matter and therefore an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.
9. Ms X has complained that she is unhappy with the Council disclosing her personal address to enforcement agents. This is a matter for the Information Commissioner’s Office as it relates to the use of personal data. The Ombudsman will not exercise discretion to investigate matters where there is another body better placed to deal with it.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman