Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax account administration as it is unlikely we will find fault that caused Mr X a significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to honour a council tax payment agreement and wrongly took recovery action on his account, issuing him with two court summons and involving enforcement agents (bailiffs). Mr X says he has been fearful to answer his door due to this and has been impacted financially. Mr X wants the Council to remove extra charges added to his account and set his balance to zero, as he says he has paid the correct amount of council tax.

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 causing a significant injustice to justify investigating (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In its complaint responses to Mr X, the Council acknowledged a payment arrangement had been in place but said this was superseded when Mr X’s entitlement to council tax support changed and a new balance was created on the account which Mr X was liable to pay. It explained it sent reminder notices about this and when no payment was forthcoming, it issued Mr X with a court summons which added costs to the account. The Council later cancelled the summons and removed the costs as a gesture of good will.
8. Mr X is unhappy as he had complained about the Council’s handling of his account and it had scheduled the complaint response for the same day as the summons hearing, which meant he had to attend court. Mr X feels this could have been avoided.
9. I recognise Mr X remains unhappy about what took place, but the Council is entitled to take recovery action which would not necessarily stop even if a complaint was being investigated. Nothwithstanding this, as the Council did later cancel the summons and removed the costs, I consider there is insufficient remaining injustice caused to Mr X, from any alleged fault, to justify our further involvement in this matter.
10. In his complaint to us, Mr X said his account should be zero as he has paid all that he owed. We will not investigate this as Mr X has the right to appeal against this to the Valuation Tribunal (VT), the independent body that determines council tax disputes. We are not empowered to make such rulings on liability and so it is reasonable to expect Mr X to resort to his appeal remedy.
11. The Council acknowledged its communication could have been better and that it may have contributed to Mr X’s misunderstanding and frustration. I understand Mr X remains unhappy about this, but I do not consider any injustice caused to Mr X from any Council fault in this regard is sufficient to justify our further involvement.
12. Mr X refers to bailiff action but there is no reference to this in the complaint documents in the year prior to Mr X complaining to us in June 2026. Mr X does say he has been experiencing problems since October 2024, but we will not investigate matters that took place more than a year before June 2026. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have complained to us sooner and there are not good reasons to investigate now.
13. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we will find fault causing a significant injustice, the VT is the agency to determine liability on appeal and any complaint about events that took place more than a year before June 2026 is made late.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman