Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (19 006 231)

    Statement Upheld Other 07-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained about the actions of enforcement agents working on behalf of the Council. We have found fault. The Council has agreed a satisfactory remedy.

  • Coventry City Council (19 005 229)

    Statement Not upheld Other 12-Dec-2019

    Summary: There is no evidence that of fault in how enforcement agents, working on behalf of the Council, made the decision to enter Mr C's property to attempt to recover a debt owed by a family member.

  • London Borough of Wandsworth (19 006 236)

    Statement Not upheld Other 03-Dec-2019

    Summary: The Council and its agents were not at fault when Mr X did not receive an enforcement notice. The agents followed the Regulations in posting the notice to Mr X.

  • Plymouth City Council (19 003 388)

    Statement Upheld Other 27-Nov-2019

    Summary: There was some fault by the Council. On one occasion, it failed to apply a discount that would have reduced Mr F's Council Tax liability. However, there was no fault in how the Council tried to recover unpaid tax or how bailiffs working on its behalf, acted. The Council has already apologised and adjusted the account and does not need to take further action.

  • Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council (19 006 739)

    Statement Upheld Other 25-Nov-2019

    Summary: Miss X complained the Council delayed recovering business rates incurred in 2005-06. The Council agreed to waive the debt. Therefore, I discontinued my investigation.

  • Bristol City Council (19 004 237)

    Statement Not upheld Other 21-Nov-2019

    Summary: Mr B complained the Council failed to tell him about a small business rate relief review, failed to send him reminders before escalating the case to enforcement agents and unreasonably refused to remove the enforcement agent charge when he remains entitled to small business rates relief. There is no fault in how the Council handled the case.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (19 003 964)

    Statement Upheld Other 11-Nov-2019

    Summary: Mr C complains about the way the Council billed and sought to recover business rates including a delay in the refund process which he says caused him unnecessary time, trouble and distress. The Ombudsman has found fault by the Council but considers the agreed actions of £300 and some service improvements are enough to provide a suitably remedy.

  • Westminster City Council (19 002 564)

    Statement Not upheld Other 25-Oct-2019

    Summary: Mr K, a letting agent, complains the Council unfairly pursued recovery of council tax from his tenants when it should have applied a student exemption. The Ombudsman finds there is no evidence of fault by the Council or its agent.

  • Birmingham City Council (19 003 269)

    Statement Upheld Other 16-Oct-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council was at fault for making his business liable to business rates for a property he had no connection with. The Council failed to follow proper procedures which led to Mr X receiving sudden and inappropriate contact from bailiffs about a debt he did not owe. The Council should make a payment to Mr X to recognise the time and trouble he spent pursuing the complaint and the distress caused by bailiff contact.

  • London Borough of Merton (19 003 435)

    Statement Upheld Other 15-Oct-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complains about the way the Council recovered an outstanding debt using its bailiff. The Ombudsman finds fault with how the bailiff charged the sale fee. The Ombudsman recommends the Council refund Mrs X for the sale and disposal fee and acts to prevent recurrence.