Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council attempted to steal money from her by changing her direct debit payment. This is because the matter complained about did not cause Mrs X any significant personal injustice which is serious enough to warrant an investigation. The Council has provided a suitable remedy for its fault by apologising to Mrs X.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, complains the Council attempted to steal money from her by amending her direct debit payment amount for maintenance of her stair lift.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We do not start an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We may decide not to start an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X complained the Council deliberately tried to steal over £200 from her by changing the direct debit payment amount she pays for maintenance of her stairlift. Mrs X noticed the increased figure on the same day payment was attempted and due to her prompt action the intended payment was recalled by her bank the same day. Mrs X says it caused her panic and terror to see the payment had been attempted and she spent the day resolving the issue. Mrs X asked the Council to provide financial compensation for its fault by writing off her outstanding arrears.
8. In its complaint response, the Council explained the change in the direct debit had been made due to an inputting error on its part, which had not been noted. It explained it was not a deliberate action but an unintentional error. It apologised to Mrs X for this but also noted its fault did not cause a financial injustice.
9. This is not a complaint we will investigate. This is because whilst the error caused Mrs X distress when she noticed it, it was quickly resolved the same day and no financial injustice was caused by the error. The Council has acknowledged and apologised for its error and this offers a suitable remedy for its fault. There is nothing further we would add. One of the outcomes Mrs X sought in complaining to this office was for a named officer to be subject to disciplinary action. This is not an outcome that is achievable via an investigation by this office. Disciplinary matters lie outside our remit and it is not something we can recommend.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because the Council has offered a suitable remedy for its fault by apologising to Mrs X and there is no significant unremedied injustice which is serious enough to warrant an investigation by this office.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman