Summary: Ms X complains the Council passed her debt recovery on to Enforcement Agents (bailiffs) prematurely. She complains the bailiffs were aggressive and rude towards her even though she was vulnerable and suffering with the effects of long Covid. This caused her distress. We find fault with the bailiffs for a phone conversation they had with Ms X. They have apologised and no further remedy is necessary.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council failed to calculate her council tax correctly and then passed her debt on to bailiffs who were rude and aggressive towards her.
2. Ms X feels the Council did not properly understand her complaints at stage 1 and 2.
3. Ms X would like:
• Her accounts removed from the bailiff company;
• An apology from the bailiff’s and the Council;
• The bailiff staff to have training in recognising vulnerabilities;
• The Council to stop using bailiff companies; and
• Compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Ms X, the Council and the bailiffs.
8. I also considered the relevant legislation.
9. Ms X and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

10. The Local Government Finance Act 1992 gives local authorities the power to levy and collect a dwelling tax. This is known as council tax. The main legislation concerned with the collection and recovery of council tax is the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 (as amended).
11. Before a council can pursue someone for council tax it must send a demand. If a taxpayer misses a payment, a council must issue at least one reminder notice before issuing a summons for a liability order in the magistrates’ court. They can then seek to recover payment of the sum in the liability order by various means.
12. A liability order gives a council legal powers to take enforcement action to collect the money owed. The council can add the costs of obtaining the order to the person’s debt.
13. If someone does not pay the council tax, and the costs, the council can ask bailiffs (also referred to as enforcement agents) to collect the debt. Bailiffs charge fees which also must be paid.
14. The law does not define what a vulnerable person is. The Ministry of Justice has issued ‘Taking Control of Goods: National Standards’ (“the Standards”) which set out the responsibilities of creditors and bailiffs. The Standards say -

• Creditors should remember that bailiffs act on their behalf and they are accountable for the bailiff’s actions. They must consider if the debtor is vulnerable and if so, agree clear protocols governing the approach the bailiff should take. Examples of a vulnerable debtor include someone who is seriously ill or disabled.
• Bailiffs must not:
• Falsely imply action will be taken when it cannot legally be taken
• Falsely imply a course of action will ensue before it is possible to know whether such action would be permissible
• Falsely imply action has been taken when it has not
• Falsely imply a debtor refusing entry to a property is an offence

15. If a bailiff identifies a vulnerable debtor, they should alert the creditor and ensure they act in accordance with all relevant legislation. Bailiffs should be aware that vulnerability may not be immediately obvious.

What happened

16. Ms X had outstanding council tax for three properties. After the Council took action as described in paragraph 10, the accounts were passed to bailiffs on 15 October 2020.
17. Unfortunately Ms X contracted Covid in November 2020 and appointed an advocate to act on her behalf.
18. The advocate emailed the Council on 26 November 2020 and the bailiffs on 3 December 2020 asking the debts to be put on hold as Ms X was suffering with Covid.
19. After a conversation with the advocate on 4th December 2020, the bailiffs agree to put the case on hold until 11 December.
20. The bailiffs then emailed Ms X on 15 December seeking medical evidence. The Council repeated this request in an email on 22 December.
21. Ms X tells me she was admitted to hospital with Covid in December.
22. Between December 2020 and March 2021 the bailiffs made several telephone calls and a house visit to Ms X.
23. Neither Council nor bailiffs hear from Ms X or her advocate again until 12 March 2021. The advocate told them Ms X was severely ill. The bailiffs put her case on hold again.
24. Ms X sent evidence of her condition in the form of sick notes from her GP dated 11 November 2020 – 30 January 2021, and 20 February 2021 – 20 March 2021.
25. She also had a letter from her GP dated 15 March 2021 saying she could not take part in the council tax dispute as she was ill.
26. Ms X called the bailiffs on 19 April 2021. Ms X states they were rude and condescending to her on the phone and she ended the call. The bailiff’s apologised if it caused offence and describe the call as “unfriendly”.
27. This prompted a formal complaint from Ms X on 21 April 2021 and the Council told the bailiffs to hold off any further action as she “appears to be vulnerable”.

Analysis

28. Ms X says that she felt threatened by the bailiffs. She lives with her son and was very ill with long Covid. She says they were anxious every time someone knocked at the door.
29. While I accept Ms X was extremely ill and going through a difficult period, the records from the bailiff’s show they made one house call on 2nd March 2021. On the same day her advocate called the bailiffs to say Ms X was suffering with long Covid.
30. Once the bailiffs had medical evidence from Ms X they put her case on hold and did pause contact. The Council did the same once they received medical evidence.
31. In the stage 1 complaint response the bailiffs accept the telephone staff were being “unfriendly” and spoke over Ms X as she was trying to explain she had long Covid. They apologised for this and said they would provide feedback to the manager of the member of staff.
32. In response to my enquiries the Council have said that all accounts are now on hold and returned from the bailiffs.
33. The Council say Ms X has had previous debts from other addresses which have all been written off. They are not pursuing her ex-husband for the debt at one of the addresses, as he lives abroad. When a debt is in more than one name, all people named are jointly liable for the whole debt.
34. The Council has now granted Ms X Council Tax Support as she has a low income. , The Council say in their response to me it is unlikely she will be able to pay these debts. It will therefore put these debts forward for consideration for write-off.
35. Even though Ms X is in receipt of Council Tax Support there will still be an amount payable for the next financial year which starts on 1 April 2022. The Council will set up an instalment plan and says Ms X must keep to these payments to prevent arrears building up again.

My findings

36. I accept Ms X was suffering with Covid. She did not feel the Council or bailiffs were adequately taking this into consideration. However her contact with the Council and bailiffs was limited, and the effects of long Covid are a recent discovery.
37. I do not find fault in the way in which the bailiffs carried out the debt recovery. Every time Ms X or her advocate got in touch they put the case on hold, awaiting further evidence.
38. However I do find fault with the phone call Ms X had with the bailiffs on 19th April 2021. This caused Ms X upset and distress.
39. I do not find fault in the Council’s complaint response. They were thorough and responded to all Ms X’s complaints.

Back to top

Recommended action

40. The bailiff company apologised for the telephone call. This is a satisfactory remedy.

Final decision

41. The bailiff is at fault for a telephone call made to Ms X, causing upset and distress. The apology given is an adequate remedy.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

42. I did not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the calculation of the outstanding Council tax as Ms X had the option to go to the Valuation Tribunal. The Tribunal is set up to deal with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman