Summary
Mr C complained about the councils revision of his council tax liability on his former shared property and was unhappy that they were pursuing him for this. He said he had not received an adequate explanation of the amount owed or an adequate response to his complaints.
Mr C initially visited the council's office for an explanation and, when he did not receive a satisfactory response, he wrote to the council twice. He did not receive a response to either letter and so he submitted a complaint. In responding to the complaint, the council apologised to Mr C for not responding to his letters and for the fact he was not able to obtain an explanation when he visited their office. They said they would raise this with the office manager.
The council went on to provide Mr C with what we considered to be a clear explanation of the amount owed. They provided a detailed breakdown of his account and explained why they were obliged to pursue both Mr C and his former flatmate for the debt. As they appeared to have managed Mr C's account in line with the relevant rules and procedures, and as we saw no evidence that he had been charged an incorrect level of council tax, we did not uphold this element of his complaint.
As the council had not provided an explanation when Mr C first contacted them, we upheld this aspect of his complaint. However, as they had already acknowledged their failings, apologised to Mr C, and taken steps to try to prevent a repeat occurrence, as well as offering a clear explanation of the outstanding balance, we did not make any recommendations.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201302838 as a PDF (11.33 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018