Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s charges for Mr X’s failure to keep to a payment plan for council tax arrears. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council started enforcement proceedings without telling him first. When he complained he says the Council told him it would cancel the enforcement charges, but the compliance charges would still be payable.
2. Mr X says he would like the Council to cancel the compliance charges and to communicate with him before sending enforcement letters.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A (6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. As part of my assessment I have

• considered the complaint by Mr X and the complaint correspondence he exchanged with the Council; and
• issued a draft decision inviting Mr X to reply; and
• considered Mr X’s response to the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. In January 2020 Mr X complained the Council started enforcement proceedings without telling him despite him making continuous payments. Mr X also said he had ignored a previous summons in 2019 because an officer had told him it had been sent by mistake. However, he decided to pay the enforcement charges anyway and made arrangements to clear his arrears.
6. In its response the Council has said it initially issued a summons in January 2019 for the previous years’ arrears. When Mr X failed to pay, the court issued a liability order in March 2019 which was sent to its enforcement team in May that year.
7. When Mr X failed to keep to the agreements it had made with him regarding his arrears, it tried to contact him. However, Mr X did not respond.
8. The Council said it was at this point it decided to start enforcement action. However, it said it did not have to notify Mr X of its intention to enforce the arrears because it already had a liability order.
9. The Council eventually agreed to cancel the enforcement fee due to Mr X’s vulnerability but told him he must pay the compliance fee within 21 days.
10. Mr X has admitted he was aware of the summons but says he did not attend the hearing as he was told it was issued in error. However, Mr X also admits he knew he was in arrears. Therefore, there is no evidence to suggest the summons was issued in error. In any case the summons led to a liability order and we cannot investigate a decision made by the courts.
11. I recognise Mr X made a payment arrangement for the arrears. However, as
    Mr X failed to keep to the plan, for example by not paying the full amount of agreed instalments, the Council was entitled to enforce the arrears. This is because they were subject to a liability order. So, the Council is not at fault.
12. I also recognise Mr X’s insistence he was not in arrears because he made a payment every month. However, the Council has made it clear the reason for saying Mr X did not keep to the agreement was he did not pay enough, not that he did not pay at all.
13. The Council has said it tried to contact Mr X and only sent the enforcement officer when Mr X failed to reply. There is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part here. Even if the Council failed to write to Mr X before sending an enforcement officer to his house, the Council had no duty to inform him of its intention to enforce the arrears anyway. The court had already issued a liability order. Therefore, the Council could enforce the order without any further communication.
14. The Council has cancelled the enforcement fees due to Mr X’s vulnerability. Mr X does not seem to have told the Council about this vulnerability until he complained about the enforcement. I recognise the Council is still demanding the compliance fee. However, it is entitled to receive these fees since Mr X failed to stick to the payment plan, so there is no fault here.
15. Mr X also says the Council has sent him another letter saying he owes money. The Council made it clear the compliance fee was payable within 21 days. Therefore, the Council is entitled to send him a demand for this since it is clear
    Mr X has not paid.

Back to top

Final decision

16. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman