Summary: A council taxpayer complained the Council was unreasonably asking her to pay enforcement agents’ fees relating to a previous council tax debt. But we do not have grounds to investigate this matter because it is unlikely we would establish sufficient evidence to justify finding fault with the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Ms X, complained the Council was unreasonably chasing her to pay enforcement agents’ fees relating to previous arrears of council tax which she has now paid off. In particular Ms X said she was not liable to pay the fees because she did not receive a notice of enforcement or an enforcement visit from the agents, as the Council claimed.

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 provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information Ms X provided with her complaint, and her comments in response to a draft version of this decision. In addition I took account of documents the Council provided about the enforcement process and its correspondence with Ms X regarding her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

4. Where a council has obtained a liability order against someone because of council tax arrears there are several ways it can recover the debt. One way is to refer the debt to enforcement agents.
5. Before visiting to take control of the debtor’s goods an enforcement agent must issue a notice of enforcement to the person at least seven before taking any action. This is the compliance stage in the process. Once an agent makes a first visit to the property the compliance stage ends and the enforcement stage begins.
6. The Government has set standard fees for enforcement agents. These are £75 for the compliance (letter) stage, £235 for the enforcement (visits) stage, and £110 for the sale and disposal stage.
7. Ms X fell behind with her council tax payments for the 2017/2018 tax year. As a result the Council obtained a liability order against her for the arrears and then referred the debt to enforcement agents to collect.
8. The Council said the agents sent Ms X a notice of enforcement in October 2017. But Ms X said she did not receive this.
9. The Council said an enforcement agent then visited Ms X’s property in February 2018 and left another notice confirming that the enforcement stage of the process had started. Ms X said she also did not receive this notice.
10. The Council said that Ms X telephoned its council tax service in June 2018 and it advised her to contact the enforcement agents about her 2017/2018 arrears. The Council said at no time during this call did Ms X question that the debt was with the enforcement agents. Ms X said this was the first time she was told that enforcement agents were involved.
11. The agent made another visit to Ms X’s property in July 2018 when she was not at home and he left another notice about taking control of her goods. Ms X said she received the notice this time.
12. Ms X subsequently complained to the Council because the enforcement agents added their compliance and enforcement fees of £310 to her outstanding debt. Ms X said because she had not received a notice of enforcement the fees were not validly charged.
13. The Council sent a final response to Ms X in September 2018 saying it did not uphold her complaint because the correct procedures had been followed.
14. Ms X subsequently paid off her council tax arrears. However she refused to pay the enforcement agents’ fees of £310 on the basis she had not received the relevant notices from the agents.
15. In 2019 Ms X complained again to the Council after further contacts from the enforcement agents. The Council reviewed matters again, but in February 2020 it confirmed its view that the agents’ fees had been correctly applied in Ms X’s case, and that she was aware the debt was with the agents prior to July 2018. The Council also offered Ms X an arrangement to pay the outstanding amount in three monthly instalments.
16. But Ms X remained dissatisfied, and later in 2020 she complained to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Analysis

17. Having considered all of the information provided in Ms X’s case, I have reached the view that we should not investigate her complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find enough evidence to justify finding fault with the Council.
18. In particular I do not see that we would be in a position to say with any certainty that the enforcement agents did not send Ms X a notice of enforcement in October 2017 or that an agent did not visit her property in February 2018.
19. First, a notice of enforcement can be validly issued by post, and the Council’s records indicate a letter was sent out. I do not see we could fault the Council’s agents if they sent a notice to Ms X by post in October 2017, even if she did not receive it.
20. Ms X questioned whether the enforcement agent visited her property in February 2018, mainly because his vehicle log showed that he parked some distance away in a road with a similar name. But the Council said the agent also had another call to make in the road where he parked. The Council also provided a copy of the notice he said he left at Ms X’s property.
21. In the circumstances I do not see that we are in a position to establish now exactly what took place in February 2018, or that an investigation is likely to uncover sufficient evidence to show that the agent did not make the visit to Ms X’s property or leave another notice there.

Back to top

Final decision

22. We do not have reason to investigate Ms X’s complaint that the Council is unreasonably pursuing her for enforcement agents’ fees relating to a previous council tax debt. This is because it is unlikely we would establish sufficient evidence to justify finding fault with the Council regarding this matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman