Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about enforcement agents engaging in intimidating behaviour as they took videos and photographs of his property and vehicle, and remained parked outside his home for some time. He also complains the agent discussed their visit with a neighbour. This is because the alleged fault has not caused any significant injustice. In addition, there is another body better placed to consider Mr X’s complaint about a breach of privacy.

The complaint

Mr X complains enforcement agents engaged in intimidating behaviour. He says they took videos and photographs of his property and vehicle, and remained parked outside his home for some time. He also complains the agent discussed the reasons for their visit with his neighbour. Mr X says this is a breach of his privacy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

2. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
3. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council obtained a liability order for a council tax debt Mr X owed. The Council passed this debt to the enforcement agent to action.
5. The enforcement agent sent Mr X a notice of enforcement letter in December 2023.
6. In May 2024, the enforcement agent completed a visit to Mr X property. Records showed that no contact was made with Mr X as he was not in the property. Video footage showed the enforcement agent took a picture of the front of Mr X’s property and posted a letter.
7. An investigation is not justified as the alleged fault has not caused Mr X any significant injustice. He says the enforcement agents deployed intimidating tactics but the impact of this was limited as Mr X was not at home at the time the visit and the actions taken by the agents.
8. Mr X says the enforcement agents spoke with his neighbour and discussed the reason for their visit. Mr X considers this to be a breach of his privacy. As Mr X is complaining about a data breach by the enforcement agent, this complaint would be best considered by the Information Commissioner’s Office. Therefore, this is not a matter the Ombudsman can consider.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the alleged fault has not caused any significant injustice. In addition, there is another body better placed to consider Mr X’s complaint about a breach of privacy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman