Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about business rates. The complaint about the Council seeking payment from Mr X is fundamentally about the Council taking court action. The law prevents us investigating that. Mr X also wants to recover his legal costs. It is reasonable to expect him to take court action on that point.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council pursued him for business rates he did not owe. He says this caused financial difficulty because he incurred legal fees and he also experienced stress and lost sleep.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council pursued Mr X for business rates. Mr X argues it should have been clear to the Council from the outset that he was not liable for the rates in question because he had been bankrupt. The central point of the complaint is that the Council took court action regarding the alleged debt. The Council ended the court action when it decided Mr X had not been liable.
8. The restriction in paragraph 2 prevents the Ombudsman considering the Council’s decision to start court action or anything related to the court action that happened up to the point the court action ended. That is the case even though the Council ended the court action. So we cannot consider whether the Council was at fault for taking court action. Any other points related to the Council’s attempts to get payment, such as the Council sending demands or instructing enforcement agents, are too closely linked to the court action for us to be able to consider them.
9. Mr X states he incurred legal costs of over £10,000 defending the legal action. He wants the Council to pay those costs plus compensation.
10. The courts can consider this. Mr X told the Council more than once he would take court action if it did not pay him.
11. Mr X’s complaint to us does not say if he actually started court action. If he did start court action, the restriction in paragraph 3 means we cannot consider this point.
12. If Mr X has not taken court action, the restriction in paragraph 4 applies. Mr X is seemingly able to take court action against the Council on this point because he repeatedly threatened to do so. There is a potential cost to court action, but that does not automatically make it unreasonable to expect Mr X to go to court. In any event, Mr X could ask the court for his costs if his court action succeeds. Also, the matter turns on points of law about who is liable for rates, and when, where a bankruptcy has occurred. Mr X and the Council have differing interpretations of how the law applied in the circumstances of Mr X’s case. It is for the courts, not the Ombudsman, to interpret the law in such circumstances. Therefore it is reasonable to expect Mr X to take court action.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. The complaint about the Council pursuing Mr X for payment is fundamentally about the Council taking court action, which the law prevents us considering. Whether or not Mr X has taken court action to recover his costs, it is reasonable to expect him to do so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman