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.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr K complains the Council wrongly pursued recovery of council tax from his tenants because they should have student exemptions. He also says the property was empty for a period and the Council did not revise liability. As a result, he paid council tax and fees he should not have had to pay, and this caused his tenant distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have discussed the complaint with Mr K and considered the complaint and the correspondence he provided. I have made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. I have also considered Mr K’s comments on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr K manages a property with two tenants who are students. The tenants are liable for council tax. They had supplied student certificates, so the Council applied an exemption to the council tax account, meaning they had nothing to pay. However, in June 2018 the Council removed the student exemption for one of the students, Mr A, because his student certificate stated his course ended in June 2018. The Council sent a bill to Mr A and his joint tenant Ms B, for £400.
6. Mr A and Ms B did not pay the council tax bill and so after sending a reminder the Council sent a summons to both students in September 2018. It added costs of £112. The Council then obtained a liability order in court. The Council could now recover the council tax using enforcement agents. The Council sent a notice confirming this to Mr A and Ms B. The Council passed the account to its enforcement agents in October 2018. The agents added a compliance fee of £75 to the account. The agents sent a notice of enforcement to Ms B on 8 November 2018, which explained the agents would visit to take control of goods if the outstanding amount was not paid. The total amount now due was £587.
7. Mr K sent the Council student certificates for Mr A and Ms B on 16 November 2018. He says it was the second time he sent these.
8. On 28 November 2018 the enforcement agent visited Mr A and Ms B’s home because they had not made payment. Mr A let him in. The agent said he was seeking recovery of £822 from Ms B. The agent called Ms B by telephone as she was on holiday. He explained he was seeking recovery of council tax arrears.
9. Mr A called Mr K because English is not his first language and he was distressed. Mr K said there should be nothing to pay as he had sent in student certificates. He called the police as he considered the agent’s actions were criminal. The police arrived and accepted the agent had papers showing a liability order. The agent called the Council and it confirmed that it had received student certificates and it had applied a further student exemption that day. However, it did not cover the whole period and council tax of £236 was still due. Mr K spoke to the agent and says he agreed to pay £236 if the agent left the property. He paid £236 but Mr A called Mr K a few minutes later and said that the agent was now seeking £310 for the agent’s fees. Mr K says that because the agent was threatening to remove laptops on which they had their course work, Mr A agreed to pay £310 under duress. Mr K later paid £310 to Mr A because he said the Council and agent were wrong and he would seek a refund from the Council.
10. Mr K complained to the Council that it had not applied a student exemption to the account when he had sent it student certificates. He said that it had not sent a summons to Mr A for £236, so it could not legally take enforcement action against him. He said his tenant had been informed that £236 was owing on the day of the agent’s visit. But the summons was for a different amount. He said the agent’s notices did not refer to Mr A but to Ms B and yet the agents demanded money from Mr A.
11. The Council replied that the council tax arrears for 2018 were due to Mr A’s student status ending in June 2018. The Council had sent a bill, reminder and a summons to the tenants. It obtained a liability order in court in October 2018. It had then passed the account to its enforcement agent on 16 October 2018. The Council confirmed it had received the student certificates on 16 November and had applied a further exemption on 28 November 2018. It explained it had informed the enforcement agent during his visit that the amount outstanding was reduced to £236. It did not consider it was at fault, and said the enforcement agent’s fees were payable.
12. Mr K complained further. He considered the agent’s actions were unlawful because he did not have a summons for £236 and the Council had confirmed to Mr K there had been no summons for £236. He complained the agent gave false information to the police. In his view the Council should have told the agent to withdraw as there was no valid summons. However, the agent insisted on payment of £236 and of his fees of £310. He asked the Council to refund the fees of £310 to him, because he had reimbursed Mr A’s payment of £310.
13. The Council upheld its earlier response. It did not consider it was at fault or that it should refund £310 that Mr A had paid. It said it received the student certificate after the summons was issued and after it had sent the case to its enforcement agent. The Council said it was satisfied that Mr A freely offered to pay £310 on behalf of Ms B.

Analysis

Was there fault by the Council?

14. I have not found evidence of fault by the Council. It removed the student exemption because the certificate ended in June 2018. It sent the required bills and notices to Mr A and Ms B, but had no response. It sent a summons in both Mr A and Ms B’s name as they were jointly liable, and it obtained a liability order against both parties for £512 including court costs. It did not receive a new student certificate for Mr A until 16 November 2018. The Council had already passed the account to its enforcement agent at this point. There was no significant delay in applying the exemption and the agent was informed on the same day that the amount had reduced. This is the reason the agent revised the amount outstanding from £822 to £546. The amount outstanding under a liability order can be revised to a lower amount, and the recovery process can continue. The Council does not need to seek a further liability order, or withdraw recovery action if there is still an amount outstanding. I have not found fault here.

Was there fault by the enforcement agent?

15. The agent spoke to the Council at the visit and it advised it had reduced the council tax to £236. The agent says he explained at the visit that the council tax of £236 was still due as well as the enforcement fees of £310. While Mr K paid £236, the fees were still outstanding and so he could pursue recovery of this. I have not found fault here.
16. The enforcement agent confirms the account details he received referred to Ms B, not Mr A. However, the enforcement agent explained he could pursue recovery by removing goods from the property. Mr A offered to pay the amount outstanding rather than allow Ms B’s goods to be removed. I have not found fault here. Enforcement agents can take payments offered by third parties rather than pursue recovery by removing goods. It is also important to note that both tenants were liable according to the bills and liability order. Therefore, the Council could have advised the agent that he could recover from either Ms B or Mr A, or both.
17. In his complaint Mr K referred to a period the property was empty. But I have not seen evidence that Mr K advised the Council the property was empty. Mr K also emailed the Council on 10 October 2018 to say the property was let to the tenants for two years until August 2019. I have not found fault here.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I have not found evidence of fault by the Council or its agent and so I have completed my investigation and closed the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman