The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation. We cannot investigate the service of a summons as it is court action, and we are prevented by law from investigating.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council did not provide evidence of the service of a council tax summons. He says the Council should have sent a text or email. He also complains the Council is seeking full recovery from him when it should not seek more than 50%, as it should pursue the former jointly liable person. He says the Council has not assessed council tax support and failed to consider his household’s vulnerability.
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 or continue 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)).
We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended).
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complained to the Council regarding the matters in paragraph 1.
The Council responded and provided details of the notices it had sent. It said it had sent all notices by post until the end of September 2025. It deemed the summons was properly served. It said the Royal Mail had not returned any bills or notices as undelivered. The Council agreed Mr X asked for updates via text in 2021. But it could verify what texts it had sent from 2021.
The Council also said it would not split the debt because both parties were jointly liable for the whole amount.
it had received Mr X’s council tax reduction claim, but had not yet received information about Universal Credit.
It required evidence Mr X received child benefit for his child.
Mr X could claim discretionary council tax reduction. It provided information about this and asked for supporting evidence.
It had put the account on hold and would recall the account from its agent if Mr X paid by direct debit.
We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigation. The Council has explained that it is not at fault in seeking recovery of 100% of the outstanding council tax from Mr X. It updated Mr X regarding his council tax reduction claim and invited him to claim a discretionary council tax reduction. It placed a temporary hold on the account.
The Council explained the notices it sent. Text messages and emails can be sent to update a council tax payer, but they do not replace formal notices such as reminders, final notices and summonses. These are required to be sent by post. It does not appear the Council was at fault in deeming the notices prior to the summons were served.
We cannot investigate the service of the summons or the liability order proceedings as these are court proceedings.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot investigate the service of the summons or the liability order proceedings.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman