Summary: Ms B complained about the conduct of a bailiff who was acting on behalf of the Council. We discontinued our investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms B complained about the way a bailiff company, acting on behalf of the Council, treated her. She said the bailiff failed to consider her vulnerability and behaved unprofessionally.
2. She also complained the Council failed to consider the complaint through its own procedure.
3. She said this caused her distress and negatively affected her mental health. She said she felt unsafe in her home after the incident.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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)
5. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.
6. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered the information Ms B provided with her complaint. I made enquiries with the Council and considered its response with relevant law and guidance.
8. Ms B and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I carefully considered all the comments I received before reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Chronology

9. What follows is a summary of key events, it does not contain all the information I reviewed during my investigation.
10. I use the term ‘Bailiff(s)’ throughout this statement to refer to the enforcement agent/ company.
11. Ms B had a debt from an unpaid Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) that was issued in 2019.
12. In April 2020 the Council applied to Court for a warrant to recover the unpaid charge. The Court authorised the warrant and the debt was passed to a bailiff company to recover the money on behalf of the Council.
13. Ms B complained to the bailiffs in November 2020. She said she had appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal about the PCN.
14. Ms B paid the outstanding debt in full in December 2020.
15. In February 2021 Ms B complained to the bailiffs. She complained about the conduct of the bailiff that attended her address in December 2020.
16. Ms B asked for information about the company vulnerability policy and staff training. The bailiff company responded in Aprill 2021. It told Ms B its bailiffs are court certified and part of the certification includes vulnerability and Equality Act awareness.
17. Ms B was unhappy with the response and complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

18. I discontinued my investigation for the following reasons:
19. I cannot achieve the outcome Ms B wants. Ms B wants the costs refunding. This is not a likely outcome because the costs relate to the debt caused by the unpaid PCN. The correct way to challenge the PCN is through the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
20. Ms B also wants the Council to stop using the bailiff company to recover its debt. This is not an outcome I can achieve or a recommendation I would make.
21. Further investigation is unlikely to achieve a different outcome. Ms B complained about the actions of a bailiff who attended her address in December 2020. Because of the delay raising her complaint the bailiffs body camera footage was no longer available. It is unlikely I would be able to reach a finding on this point when the evidence is no longer available.
22. Ms B said the bailiffs behaviour amounted to a hate crime against her. If Ms B alleges she is the victim of a crime she should report this matter to the Police. The Ombudsman does not investigate allegations of criminal offences.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I discontinued my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman