Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's decision to recover council tax arrears through an Attachment of Earnings Order. This is because further investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault in the Council's actions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has continued to recover Council Tax arrears through an Attachment of Earnings Order (AOE) despite being aware he is homeless and experiencing financial hardship. He says the deductions are causing financial difficulties and affecting his mental health. Mr X says the Council did not properly consider his request for discretion due to exceptional hardship. He wants the Council to suspend the AOE, refund deductions already taken and agree an affordable repayment arrangement.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. If a taxpayer is in PAYE employment, a Council may issue an Attachment of Earnings Order (AEO) to recover council tax arrears. The only discretions the Council has are to make the order, not make the order, or stop an existing order. The payments are collected by the employer. Once an order is paid the council must write and tell the employer. Up to two council tax AEOs may be in place at any one time and the level of deductions is set by legislation.
6. Mr X had substantial council tax arrears relating to a former property. The Council says it previously attempted to recover the debt through other recovery methods, but these were unsuccessful. It therefore decided to recover the arrears through an AEO.
7. Mr X complained the AOE was unaffordable, and he asked the Council to write off the arrears, or reduce recovery action, because he considered the deductions unaffordable given his homelessness, financial hardship and personal circumstances.
8. The Council considered the information Mr X provided about his circumstances when considering his requests to stop or reduce recovery action. However, it decided he had sufficient income to contribute towards the arrears and noted previous attempts to recover the debt by other means had been unsuccessful. It therefore concluded that an AEO remained appropriate.
9. The Council later reviewed the level of deductions being taken from Mr X's earnings and withdrew one of the two council tax AEOs after further considering his financial circumstances and the other deductions being taken.
10. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. We do not question whether a council's decision was right or wrong simply because someone disagrees with it. Our role is to consider whether the council followed the correct process or if there was fault in the way the decision was made.
11. We will not investigate Mr X's complaint because further investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault in the Council's actions. Through its complaints process, the Council explained how it had considered Mr X's circumstances and requests for relief before deciding recovery action should continue. This is a decision it was entitled to make and while Mr X disagrees with that decision, disagreement with a decision, by itself, is not evidence of fault.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint; this is because further investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault in the Council's actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman