Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax recovery. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X says he had made a payment arrangement for council tax arrears and paid. However, the Council’s enforcement agent pursued council tax recovery, visiting him very early in the morning. Mr X also says the agent’s body worn camera was not working, and a further unidentified agent in the car caused him distress. Mr X says the Council accepted the agent’s account of events and did not consider his vulnerability.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X complained to the Council and its agent regarding the matters in paragraph 1.
5. The agent replied it had contacted Mr X and sent notifications before its visit. It had received a payment of £350. However, Mr X had not contacted it, and it had not agreed to a payment arrangement. It set out its record of the visit. It confirmed enforcement regulations allowed visits from 6AM. The agent had delivered a letter and turned off his body worn camera, then returned to his car. This was in line with its procedures. The agent said it would consider evidence of Mr X’s vulnerability, as well as potentially waiving the enforcement stage fee of £235.
6. The Council confirmed that Mr X had not responded to the agent’s earlier contact. It said the agent had not agreed an arrangement and that the agent’s app could not set up payment plans. It said the agent treated Mr X’s payment of £350 as a part‑payment only. Therefore, there was no fault by the Council’s agent in progressing to the next stage applying the fees. The Council said there was no evidence Mr X raised his vulnerability before his stage one complaint.
7. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or its agent to warrant our involvement. The Council confirms Mr X did not have a payment arrangement, and he did not contact the agent before the recovery action progressed which incurred fees. The agent has also offered to consider removing some of the fees.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman