In today's fast-paced world, mental health has become a real concern across many parts of our society.

This is no different in the world of public services...

…or, more specifically, how people engage with them.

The recent experience of Phillip Richards and Lisa Ives from Birkenhead is an example of this that we want to take a look at. As regular followers of ours will know, the whole CES team is trained to spot signs of vulnerability and to signpost those in need to the correct channels of support.

In this case though, the couple in question found their mental health affected by what they labelled as a 'mistake' from the council. This added another layer of difficulty to an already difficult situation and highlights the importance for councils to get enforcement right in terms of their correspondence with citizens.

The background to the story is that the couple's situation shows the complexities of administrative processes and underlines the long-lasting effects that bureaucratic oversight can have on individuals' metal well-being.

In February 2025, Richards and Ives were informed that they owed £3,143.80 in council tax for a period spanning April 2020 to October 2023.

The anxiety stemming from the prospect of Enforcement Agent's arriving at their doorstep left Lisa, in particular, feeling "terrified".

The couple's troubles came from an earlier dispute with the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) regarding housing benefit. This was an ordeal which they believed was resolved in their favour, but the worst of the stress was yet to come.

As part of a reduction scheme aimed at assisting individuals on the lowest incomes, Lisa's council tax was previously covered under benefits. Following their decision to live together in 2019, Phillip and Lisa promptly notified the DWP of their new living arrangement.

The DWP failed to process this claim accurately, which is where the real problem lies.

Mistakes happen in all forms of work, but this one was costly as it led to a series of administrative errors that affected the couple's benefits. It also caused plenty of confusion and distress regarding their tax liabilities.

Despite their efforts to resolve the matter, which involved spending countless hours drafting hundreds of emails, a satisfactory resolution could not be found. The issue was compounded by a lack of clear communication. This was evidenced by documents confirming they owed zero council tax between April 2021 and March 2023, alongside a letter affirming both council tax support and housing benefits dated March 9th, 2022.

The couple only received communication regarding changes to their benefits five months later, in July 2022, leaving them in a precarious position.

The ramifications of enforcement actions like this are significant and far-reaching.

For councils, understanding the mental health implications tied to enforcement decisions is critical.

The psychological burden placed on individuals can exacerbate existing mental health challenges, leading to feelings of helplessness and despair. For this reason, ensuring that enforcement actions are executed fairly and with transparency is essential.

As this case shows, the importance of getting enforcement tight cannot be overstated.

Councils have a responsibility to mitigate stress and uncertainty for residents.

By prioritising clear communication, accurate processing of claims and empathetic handling of disputes, local authorities can play a pivotal role in supporting mental health within their constituencies.

Despite the errors regarding their benefits, the culmination of the struggle reached a turning point when the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) attempted to take legal action against them.

The case was unsuccessful, and the couple received an email confirming that a housing benefit debt of £8,210.98 had been written off.

While this should have brought relief, the emotion toll was heavy from navigating a complex system that had repeatedly failed them.

Phillip, who works full-time, expressed the frustration the couple felt throughout this ordeal.

"If we were wrong, we would pay it. If we were wrong, we would have now probably paid any bills, but when you know you are in the right, it's frustrating."

The couple's consistent attempts to communicate and seek clarity were met with silence.

Numerous emails and phone calls turned up little more than generic responses.

Lisa was frustrated by the lack of any genuine engagement with their situation.

"It took months for them to notice what was going on. We wanted it resolved years ago when we first started ringing when we heard about the housing overpayments. They didn't even make us aware of it. They have hid it very well."

The emotional fallout of this experience was significant. Lisa said that she was scared to take her "babies out of the house" due to worries about Enforcement Agents.

Her description of her mental state reveals the severe impact that such enforcement issues can have on mental health. Again, this is why it's so important to get it right.

It also highlights a common misconception about Enforcement Agents, that they are something to be scared of. This is something we are always trying to counteract at CES with our ethical enforcement, high standards and commitment to public welfare.

This experience illustrates how vital it is for local authorities to prioritise mental health considerations when engaging in enforcement actions.

It's about adopting a more compassionate approach. In doing so, councils can help alleviate the distress that comes with such interactions.

It is paramount for councils to recognise that while compliance and enforcement are crucial, compassion and communication are equally important in ensuring a supportive environment for all residents.

A spokesperson for Wirral Council said:

"The council has a duty to address outstanding debt according to its records. The appeal hearing relevant to this case ruled that the original overpayment of housing benefit was the result of an error unrelated to the council, which meant income-related Employment and Support Allowance continued to be paid, and the council did not receive notification of the change in circumstances at the time."

The spokesperson added:

"The effect of the judgement on the rate of council tax that should have applied during that time is being investigated, and we hope to be able to inform the resident directly of the outcome of that process very shortly."

Clearly, the council is taking steps to rectify the situation.

Following inquiries from the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS), the couple was informed by the council that an error had been made. Most of the charges, including liability order costs, would be reversed, lowering the amount owed to £970.49.

Despite the council's actions to modify the debt, the couple still faces other council tax arrears.

They are required to pay £135.78 for April 2025, followed by 11 monthly payments of £132.00. The local authority acknowledged the delay in updating the couple's council tax account and apologised for the oversight.

Phillip and Lisa still plan to contest the amount they have been told they owe.

Court Enforcement Specialists always emphasise the importance of getting it right with paperwork for citizens, debtors and tenants. It's only right that we highlight the importance of this for councils as well.

The potential for damage to people's mental health is so important to consider.

Proper communication and timely resolution of issues are crucial in safeguarding the well-being of residents.

Everyone deserves a fair and compassionate approach from their local authorities.