Birmingham City Council (20 003 530)

Category : Benefits and tax > Other

Decision : Upheld

Decision date : 10 Feb 2021

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr C complained that he arranged to clear his council tax debt but despite this, his case was passed on to the enforcement stage. He also complained of threatening behaviour by the enforcement agent and his vulnerability was not considered. We find fault because the Council’s enforcement agent failed to act on Mr C’s claim of vulnerability. However, this did not cause him a significant injustice. There is further fault as the enforcement agent failed to respond to Mr C’s email and it incorrectly increased the amount he owed. The enforcement agent apologised to Mr C and corrected his account. The Council has also now waived the outstanding enforcement fees. This is a suitable remedy.

The complaint

  1. Mr C complained that he arranged to clear his council tax debt but despite this, his case was passed on to the enforcement stage. Mr C also complained of threatening behaviour by the enforcement agent. He says he is vulnerable and has a young child and this has not been considered.
  2. Mr C says it has been stressful and caused him financial hardship.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)
  2. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), 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

  1. I considered information Mr C submitted with his complaint. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered information it provided in response.
  2. Mr C and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Council tax recovery

  1. The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 cover both the way councils collect payments of council tax and the way councils can recover council tax debt. The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and associated regulations cover the way enforcement agents may recover debts.
  2. To use the various powers available to it to recover unpaid council tax, a council has to apply to the Magistrates Court for a liability order against those it believes are liable. Once a council has obtained a liability order it can take recovery action.
  3. A liability order gives a council legal powers to take enforcement action to collect the money owed. This can include taking deductions from benefits, getting an attachment of earnings (by which deductions are taken directly from earnings by an employer and passed to the Council) or using enforcement agents. The Council can decide which recovery method it wishes to use.

Taking Control of Goods Regulation 2013

  1. Councils may ask enforcement agents to attend a person’s property and seize goods to the value of a council tax debt if they have a liability order from the Magistrates Court.
  2. The Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 set out the fees enforcement agents can charge when recovering debt and the three stages they must follow:
  • The Compliance Stage – an enforcement agent must issue a notice of enforcement seven clear days before they take control of the goods. The fee for this stage is £75.
  • The Enforcement Stage – this stage starts once an enforcement agent has made a first visit. At this visit they can take control of the goods. Once they have done this they must give the debtor a notice. The fee for this stage is £235. If outstanding debts are more than £1500, enforcement agents can charge a further 7.5% of the amount outstanding over £1500.
  • The Sale or Disposal Stage – this stage starts once an enforcement agent has taken control of the goods. They must then allow seven clear days between the removal of goods and their sale. In this time an enforcement agent must value the goods and send a copy to the debtor. The fee for this stage is £110.

What happened

  1. The Council applied to the Magistrates Court for a liability order to recover Mr C’s outstanding council tax debt of £854. The Magistrates Court issued the liability order in September 2018.
  2. In May 2019, the Council passed Mr C’s case to its enforcement agent because of unpaid council tax amounting to £213.64. The enforcement agent issued a notice of enforcement on 14 May and therefore Mr C had to pay a compliance fee of £75. It also warned Mr C he would owe an enforcement fee of £235 if it visited him at his house.
  3. Mr C set up a repayment plan with the enforcement agent on 20 May. He agreed to pay £67 per month from 1 July. However, Mr C did not pay on 1 July. After discussing the matter with Mr C, the enforcement agent set up a new repayment plan on 18 July for Mr C to pay £90 per month from 31 August.
  4. Mr C did not pay on 31 August. Mr C called the enforcement agent’s call centre and it agreed to reinstate the repayment plan. Mr C agreed to pay £90 on 30 September, with the final payment of £90 due on 31 October.
  5. Mr C made the first payment of £90 on 1 October. He did not pay the final amount on 31 October.
  6. The enforcement agent visited Mr C at his house on 4 November, but he was not there. It left a letter advising Mr C of its visit.
  7. The enforcement agent sent a text message to Mr C and said he had failed to pay council tax debt and so it would revisit him at his house the next day and add further costs of £210. Mr C replied and said he wanted to arrange payment of the remaining £90. He also said he had a child at home.
  8. He sent a further text message to the enforcement agent on 7 November and said he could not pay the remaining £90 until 28 November.
  9. The enforcement agent sent a text message to Mr C on 12 November and said if he wanted to prevent the removal of his goods, he would need to call.
  10. Mr C sent a letter to the enforcement agent on the same day. He said he wanted to stop the enforcement action as he was happy to pay the remaining £90. He asked it to accept his offer to pay £90 on 28 November. He also asked it to stop sending messages threatening to remove his goods.
  11. The enforcement agent sent an email back in response. However, it was sent to the wrong email address and so Mr C did not receive it. The email said Mr C had failed to comply with three repayment plans. It also said it visited Mr C at his house and so he had to pay £235.
  12. Mr C paid £90 on 28 November.
  13. The enforcement agent sent a text message to Mr C on 6 January 2020. It said it was due to visit him at his house that day for the removal of his goods. Mr C replied and asked what for as he had paid £90. The enforcement agent responded and said it was for the outstanding balance.
  14. The enforcement agent visited Mr C at his house on 23 January. He was not there and so it left him a letter advising of its visit. It asked for £345 to settle the account.
  15. Mr C sent a text message to the enforcement agent on 24 January and said it was harassing him. He said he was suffering from a heart condition and would report the matter to the Council.
  16. The enforcement agent visited Mr C at his house on 4 February. Mr C was present.
  17. Mr C emailed the Council and enforcement agent. He said he paid his final council tax instalment on 28 November 2019. He said he was vulnerable because he has a young child. He asked for the harassment to stop.
  18. The enforcement agent issued a response to Mr C’s complaint on 18 February. It said it had reviewed the video footage of its visit to Mr C’s house on 4 February and the officer was polite and professional. It asked Mr C for evidence of threatening behaviour. It also said it could not accept claims of vulnerability, and so asked for Mr C to provide medical evidence. It apologised for wrongly adding a sale/disposal fee of £110 to Mr C’s account. Finally, it said Mr C still had to pay £235 because of its visit on 4 November 2019.
  19. Mr C asked for a review of his complaint. He said as soon as he missed his payment on 31 October 2019, he phoned and agreed to pay the last instalment on 28 November 2019. He complained about the enforcement agent adding on £110 to his account. He said he did not receive a reply to his letter of 14 November 2019. Finally, he said he did not need to provide evidence of his heart condition.
  20. The enforcement agent responded to Mr C. It said there was no record of him contacting it between the missed payment due on 31 October 2019 and its attendance at his house on 4 November 2019. It apologised for sending its response to his letter of 14 November 2019 to an incorrect email address. It also said it had wrongly added a sale/disposal fee of £110 his case and confirmed it had removed it. It also repeated its request for evidence of his vulnerability.
  21. The Council also responded to Mr C’s complaint. It said once an account is sent to an enforcement agent for collection, the enforcement agent can charge enforcement fees. Therefore, it was correct that Mr C had to pay £235. It also said it was not aware Mr C had a young child in the house when it sent the case to the enforcement agent.
  22. Mr C remained unhappy with the Council’s response and referred his complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Analysis

  1. The evidence shows Mr C did not pay the final payment on 31 October 2019. This was the third time Mr C failed to stick to the repayment plan. Therefore, the enforcement agent visited Mr C at his house on 4 November 2019 which incurred a fee of £235. This in line with the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014. The enforcement agent warned Mr C about this cost on 14 May 2019. Mr C did ask to pay off the remaining £90 on 28 November 2019. However, by this time the visit had taken place. There is no evidence of fault.
  2. Mr C complained the enforcement agent threatened him when it went to his house on 4 February 2020. The Council cannot provide me with video evidence of this visit because it has now been destroyed. As I was not there, it is difficult for me to say whether the behaviour was threatening or not. I have reviewed the enforcement agent’s communication with Mr C during its involvement with him. I have not seen any evidence of unreasonable and threatening behaviour.
  3. Ms C says the Council and its enforcement agent failed to consider his vulnerability. He says he has a young child and a heart condition.
  4. The Council’s vulnerability policy says it may consider customers potentially vulnerable if they have a serious illness or very small children. The policy also says it will look at each case on its own merits and customers may be asked to provide medical evidence to prove their vulnerability. The Council requires its enforcement agents to return the accounts of customers if someone’s potential vulnerability comes to their attention first.
  5. The Council says when it passed Mr C’s account to its enforcement agent on 11 May 2019, it had no record of any potential health concerns or the presence of a young child. It also says the presence of young children may be a factor in determining vulnerability, but other circumstances are considered, such as the customer being a single parent or having little support available to them. Therefore, it was not appropriate to consider Mr C as vulnerable solely on the basis that he has a young child in the house. The Council also says Mr C failed to provide it with medical evidence of his heart condition.
  6. Mr C sent a text message to the enforcement agent on 4 November 2019 and said he had a child in the house. This would mean that he was potentially vulnerable according to the Council’s own policy. However, the enforcement agent did not return the account to the Council as it should have done. This is fault.
  7. My role is to consider whether this fault caused Mr C an injustice. The Council has now considered Mr C’s case and says it was not appropriate to consider him as vulnerable solely because he has a young child. Mr C also failed to provide it with evidence of his heart condition despite repeated requests. Therefore, I find that even if the enforcement agent had passed the case back to the Council, it is unlikely it would have classed Mr C as vulnerable and therefore the enforcement action would have continued.
  8. The Council has acknowledged its enforcement agent failed to respond to Mr C’s letter of 14 November 2019 because its response was sent to an incorrect email address. This is fault. The enforcement agent apologised for this. I consider this is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused to Mr C.
  9. The enforcement agent also wrongly added the sale/disposal fee of £110 to Mr C’s account. Mr C says this caused him further distress when a letter was sent asking for this additional fee. The enforcement agent apologised to Mr C and confirmed he did not need to pay it. The Council has also now waived the outstanding enforcement fees of £235 to resolve Mr C’s complaint. This is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused to him.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mr C. I am satisfied the Council has taken suitable action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings