The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council incorrectly billing Mr X’s employer for council tax and for taking enforcement action. This is because the complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. In addition, an investigation is not justified as there is insufficient evidence of fault and an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council incorrectly billed his employer for council tax and inappropriately took enforcement action. He also complains about the actions of the Council’s enforcement agents.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal about the same matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended) The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability.
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 an investigation if we decide further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council incorrectly billing his employer for council tax because Mr X can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal because the tribunal is free to use and is the appropriate body to determine council tax liability disputes. If the tribunal decides Mr X’s employer is not liable, it will tell the Council to make a refund.
During its complaint consideration, the Council explained to Mr X why it considers Mr X’s employer to be liable for council tax. The Council took appropriate steps to notify Mr X’s employer of the debt before obtaining a liability order. Therefore, an investigation is not justified as there is insufficient evidence of fault with the Council’s decision to take enforcement action.
The Council has apologised for Mr X’s employer feeling intimidated and threatened by the actions of its enforcement agents. The Council has referred the matter to be reviewed by its enforcement manager and advised Mr X he can make a complaint to the enforcement agents directly.
An investigation is not justified as it would not lead to a different outcome. This is because it is unlikely we would be able to make any findings on the enforcement agent’s actions/behaviour due to conflicting accounts.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. In addition, an investigation is not justified as there is insufficient evidence of fault and an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman