Summary: Mr X complains the Council has not dealt properly with his Council Tax. The Council was at fault because its enforcement agents did not deal with Mr X appropriately. Mr X did not suffer any significant ongoing injustice as a result.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council has not dealt properly with his Council Tax because:

• It wrongly enforced a council tax debt after it failed to apply single person discount to his account.
• the conduct of the Council’s enforcement agents was intimidating.

2. Mr X says he has been caused stress and that his mental health has been impacted.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke to Mr X about his complaint and considered documents he provided. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its response and the supporting documents it provided.
6. Mr X 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

Law, guidance and policies

7. The Local Government Finance Act 1992 s11 provides for the application of a single person discount (SPD). The Act does not specify how the SPD should be applied.
8. Government guidance ‘Guidance to local councils on good practice in the collection of council tax arrears’ says councils should remain prepared to deal directly with individuals at any point. It says councils can ‘call action back from the enforcement agents at any time and where there is a case to do so they should consider such action’.

What happened?

9. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
10. Mr X moved house in February 2022. The Council became aware of his move from his new landlord and sent a Council Tax bill to him for his new address in May 2022.
11. Mr X has Council Tax debt outstanding over several financial years. The Council passed recovery of his liabilities to its enforcement agent (EA). The EA visited Mr X at his home address on several occasions.
12. In August 2023 Mr X complained the Council had wrongly taken enforcement action because he was entitled to SPD at that address and also about the conduct of the EA.
13. The Council and the EA both responded separately to Mr X. The EA partially upheld his complaint about its conduct. The Council did not uphold Mr X’s complaint but did decide he was entitled to SPD and applied this to his Council Tax bill.

Analysis

14. The Council says, “There is no specific method for obtaining information about discounts, but authorities must be satisfied that reasonable steps have been taken in relation to every property for which a Council Tax demand is issued. Legislation states that whatever procedures are adopted, they must be applied both prior to annual billing in each year and before the issue of first demand notices throughout the year to new taxpayers.
15. Reading Borough Council has adopted the policy that requests for SPD will only be accepted by the named Council Tax payer. In addition to this Reading Borough Council will always advertise discounts on the back of every bill issued, on their website and the issued annual bill information.
16. Every Demand Notice issued to Mr X advised that he was not in receipt of SPD at his current address, but also gave details of all the available discounts and how to apply.
17. Mr X did not actually advise Reading Borough Council that he had moved, this information was obtained from the landlord, as we must not assume on the say so of the landlord that the discount circumstances remained the same. Mr X did not apply for this discount until September 2023.”
18. There is no requirement on the Council to carry over SPD from one property to another when someone moves home. I agree with the Council. I do not consider this is fault by the Council.
19. The Council took enforcement action in respect of Mr X’s Council Tax liability, that did not include the SPD because Mr X had not actually applied for it at that point in time. I do not consider this is fault by the Council.
20. The EA provides services on behalf of the Council. As highlighted in paragraph 4 above, this means its actions are considered as though they are the Council.
21. The EA upheld Mr X’s complaint in respect of a telephone call that it said fell short of the required standard. It apologised and said it had provided remedial training to the member of staff involved. This is fault by the Council, but which did not cause ongoing significant injustice to Mr X, because there is no evidence to show the EA’s actions have been the direct cause of any medical issues.
22. During my investigation, the Council has agreed as a gesture of goodwill to take all of Mr X’s outstanding Council Tax liabilities back in house from the EA. This is the outcome Mr X was looking for. Mr X should now contact the Council to agree a payment plan.
23. As his case has been withdrawn from the EA by the Council, Mr X cannot have suffered any ongoing significant injustice as a result of the actions he complained about. I have therefore not investigated any other aspects of Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of the EA any further.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I have found fault by the Council, which did not cause injustice to Mr X. I have now completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman