Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s recovery of his council tax debts. This is mostly because the Council has remedied any injustice through its complaint process. Further investigation by us would not achieve a worthwhile outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s enforcement action to recover his council tax debts. He says:
• the Council did not notify him before an enforcement agent visited his home;
• the enforcement agent did not wear a body camera during the home visit;
• the Council did not respond to his first complaint about the enforcement visit;
• the Council continued enforcement action while his complaint was ongoing; and
• the Council did not consider his vulnerabilities or offer a suitable payment arrangement.
2. Mr X says the matter caused him significant distress and emotional pressure.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating,
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained,
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement,
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complains the Council, nor its enforcement agents, notified him before the enforcement agent visited his home.
7. A notice of enforcement is valid for 12 months from the date of issue, during which enforcement agents can take control of a debtor’s goods if they do not keep to an agreed payment arrangement.
8. The evidence I have seen shows the enforcement agent visited Mr X’s home within 12 months of issuing the notice and after Mr X defaulted on repayments. It did not need to send further notice before visiting. I am satisfied the enforcement agents were entitled to visit Mr X’s home to recover the debt and it was not required to send him further notice before visiting. There is not enough evidence of fault on this point to justify us investigating.

Body camera

9. Mr X complains the enforcement agent did not wear a body camera during the enforcement visit.
10. Whilst I acknowledge Mr X’s concerns, I do not consider this matter has caused him significant enough injustice to justify us investigating. As a publicly funded body we must use our resources carefully. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
11. Mr X may complain directly to the enforcement agent company if he has ongoing concerns about this.

Failure to respond to first complaint

12. Mr X complains the Council did not respond to the first complaint he raised after the enforcement visit took place.
13. The Council has acknowledged it did not receive Mr X’s first complaint and has apologised for this. I consider this a suitable remedy for any injustice caused. Further investigation by us is unlikely to establish why the Council did not receive Mr X’s complaint and is therefore unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome.

Enforcement action during complaint

14. Mr X complains the Council did not stop enforcement action whilst his complaint was unresolved.
15. The evidence I have seen shows the Council placed a temporary hold on enforcement action shortly after it received his second complaint and was made aware of his vulnerable circumstances.
16. I acknowledge that enforcement may have continued after Mr X made his first complaint. However, the Council did not receive that complaint and so I am satisfied it was unaware of his circumstances at the time. I acknowledge this may have caused Mr X distress. However, I consider the Council’s apology and action taken after it received his second complaint are sufficient for the injustice caused. Further investigation by us is unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome.

Vulnerable circumstances and payment arrangement

17. Mr X complains the Council, and its enforcement agents, failed to consider his vulnerable circumstances or offer him a suitable payment arrangement.
18. Whilst there is no legal requirement to offer a payment arrangements, councils are expected to consider a debtor’s vulnerabilities in its debt recovery action.
19. The evidence I have seen shows the Council was not made aware of Mr X’s vulnerable circumstances until it received his second complaint. The Council then recorded his vulnerabilities within their system and raised this with its enforcement agents.
20. Since Mr X complained to us, the Council has now set up a payment arrangement for the outstanding council debt. Therefore, I am satisfied the Council has appropriately adjusted its debt recovery action to accommodate for Mr X’s vulnerabilities. Further investigation by us is unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

21. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint mostly because the Council has remedied any injustice through its complaint process. Further investigation by us would not achieve a worthwhile outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman