The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council sent council tax demands to the wrong address, which resulted in bailiffs contacting her and charging fees. The Council was at fault for failing to update Mrs X’s address. This caused her distress and meant she paid enforcement fees she should not have. The Council has already refunded the fees, apologised, and made suitable service improvements. It has agreed to pay Mrs X £200 to recognise the distress she experienced.
The complaint
Mrs X complained the Council sent council tax demands to the wrong address, which resulted in bailiffs contacting her and charging her enforcement fees. She did not become aware of the mistake for two years. Mrs X also says the Council took too long to arrange a refund of the enforcement fees. She says the Council's actions caused her distress, financial harm and meant she had to go to unnecessary time and trouble.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) If we are satisfied with an organisation’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) 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) We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner (ICO) if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I have considered: all the information Mrs X provided and discussed the complaint with her; the Council’s response to Mrs X’s complaint; the relevant law and guidance and the Ombudsman's guidance on remedies.
Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Relevant law To recover unpaid council tax, a council has to apply to the Magistrates Court for a liability order against those it believes are liable. The courts charge fees for making liability orders.
Once a council has obtained a liability order it can take recovery action. One method of recovery action is to use enforcement agents (bailiffs). Bailiffs charge fees for each step of the enforcement process. By the time a bailiff visits a person’s property for the first time, the fee totals £310.
What happened The Council uses a company (the Company) to collect its council tax. In 2018, Mrs X told the Company she had changed her address. It did not update its records and sent letters chasing a council tax bill of around £130 to her old address.
The Council sought a liability order to recover the debt and passed it to bailiffs. The bailiffs contacted Mrs X by phone and letter to request payment of the debt, plus the court and enforcement fees. The debt totalled around £540.
Mrs X says she believed she must have missed a Council tax letter asking for payment and so, she paid the debt. She says she was unable to do so in one go and therefore agreed to pay the bailiffs two lump sums.
In September 2021, Mrs X became aware the Company had failed to update its records and had sent the council tax demands to the wrong place. She contacted the Company which accepted it made a mistake after three weeks.
By November 2021, Mrs X had received a refund of the fees from the bailiffs and the court.
Complaint Mrs X complained to the Council in November 2021. She went through the Council's two stage complaints process. In summary, she said: she was unhappy the Company had failed to update its records, resulting in the bailiff’s contacting her; the contact and knowledge her case was wrongly heard in court caused her significant distress and financial harm; she had gone to undue time and trouble to pursue refunds of the enforcement and court fees. She said she had still not received the court refund; and she wanted compensation.
The Council responded to say it: accepted it was at fault for the Company’s failure to update Mrs X’s address; was sorry for the distress and inconvenience she experienced; had delayed responding to Mrs X’s contact in September 2021 because of issues caused by the COVID-19 pandemic; confirmed Mrs X had received a refund of the court fees in late November; had removed the liability order and court summons documents from her council tax records; and would pay Mrs X £200 to recognise the distress she experienced.
The Council also said it took the following actions to prevent the issue occurring again: It had addressed the mistake with the member of staff responsible.
It put additional monitoring in place.
It reminded staff about the proper processes for responding to contact from members of the public.
It had begun a review of its complaint procedure and quality checking processes. Once the review was complete, it would make any necessary further changes to its processes and carry out staff training.
Mrs X remained unhappy, refused the £200 offer, and complained to the Ombudsman. She said the offer was insufficient, it took 47 days to refund her the enforcement and court fees and the Council had breached her data by sending the letters to the wrong address.
Findings
Where an organisation provides services on behalf of a council, we can investigate those bodies. We hold the council responsible for any fault we identify. The Council has accepted the Company failed to record Mrs X’s change of address. This was fault and meant it sent the council tax demands and subsequent letters about court action and enforcement to the wrong place. This meant Mrs X ended up paying the enforcement and court fees when she should not have. She also experienced distress and inconvenience.
Mrs X complains of delay in refunding the fees. There was three weeks between Mrs X contacting the Company and it responding to accept it failed to update her address. We would expect an organisation to respond to contact in around a week so there was a two week delay. It does not amount to fault. Mrs X received the refunds within two months of first becoming aware of the issue. This was not undue delay, and, in any event, the refunds came from the bailiffs and the court; any substantive delay was not Council fault.
I have considered the actions the Council took in response to Mrs X’s complaint. I am satisfied it carried out suitable service improvements to prevent the fault occurring again. It also took action to improve the Company’s response to contact from the public. It addressed the issue with the relevant member of staff, carried out staff training and monitoring and will make further changes if it finds they are necessary.
Where the Ombudsman finds fault causing injustice, we aim to put the person back in the position they would have been had the fault not happened. Mrs X has received a refund for the fees she should not have paid. The Council has also apologised and removed the liability order and court summons from her account. This is suitable action.
The Council has offered Mrs X £200 as a symbolic gesture to recognise the distress and inconvenience the fault caused her. Mrs X feels the Council's offer is inadequate. The Council's offer of £200 is in line with our guidance on remedies and suitably remedies Mrs X’s injustice. It is ultimately up to Mrs X to decide whether to accept this payment.
If Mrs X thinks the Council breached her data, she can complain to the ICO. It is reasonable to expect her to do that because the ICO is the appropriate body to consider complaints about the handling of personal information.
Agreed action
Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council will pay Mrs X £200. This is to recognise the distress she experienced inconvenience she went to as a result of the Council's fault.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to personal injustice. I have recommended action to remedy that injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman