The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax recovery action because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr X, says the Council took him to court for council tax arrears without telling him the date and time of the hearing. Mr X says the Council has not provided proof it notified him. Mr X wants the Council to remove the court costs and give him longer to pay the arrears.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council sent Mr X a reminder because he had not paid the council tax due in April. Mr X did not bring the account up to date. The Council sent a pre-summons email and text on 8 May alerting him to the arrears. Mr X did not respond so the Council issued a summons which stated the amount he owed in council tax, the court costs and the date and time of the hearing; court costs are incurred as part of the summons.
Mr X contacted the Council after it had issued the summons. Mr X said he was in financial difficulty. Mr X applied for council tax reduction but the Council could not award any benefit because Mr X did not provide enough information.
The Council set up a payment plan for the arrears but, as of the date of the complaint replies, Mr X had not kept to it. In the meantime, the court issued a liability order which confirmed Mr X must pay the council tax and costs. The Council told Mr X the liability order allowed it to instruct bailiffs if he did not make and maintain a payment plan.
Mr X complained to the Council that it had not notified him of the court hearing and he was denied the opportunity to present his case in court. In response, the Council explained how the arrears arose and said it had issued a pre-summons email and text. It sent Mr X a copy of the summons and explained the law says it must send a summons by post to the last known address, and there is no requirement to prove it was received. The Council asked Mr X to make a payment plan to avoid further recovery action. It said it would not remove the court costs as it had served the summons correctly.
I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. I have seen a copy of the summons and the Council used the correct address. I do not know why Mr X did not receive the summons but the Council is not responsible for problems with the post. The law does not require councils to produce or hold proof of postage and, given the volume of council tax correspondence, it would not be practicable for a council to obtain proof of postage for every summons. The Council provided a copy of the summons and that is adequate proof. As such, there is no reason to start an investigation and no grounds to ask the Council to remove the court costs. We have no power to remove costs that have been confirmed by a court.
Mr X wants longer to pay the arrears. This is not something we can arrange. If Mr X has not already done so, he would need to contact the Council to arrange a payment plan.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman