Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the level of the Council’s payment to remedy Mr Y’s injustice following a previous Ombudsman decision. There is insufficient fault in the way the Council considered the level of payment to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained, on behalf of Mr Y, about the payment offered by the Council for housing them in unsuitable accommodation. He said the amount was too low and was not in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies. Mr X said the Council should increase its payment offer.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X previously complained, on behalf of Mr Y, about the Council’s failure to carry out a review of the suitability of Mr Y’s temporary accommodation, which he had asked for in February 2022 We found the Council was at fault for not carrying out the suitability review. We recommended it carry out the review and that, if it decided the temporary accommodation was unsuitable, it should remedy the injustice caused to Mr Y as a result of the delay in line with our Guidance on remedies.
7. The Council carried out the review and decided the temporary accommodation was unsuitable. It offered to pay Mr Y £150 per month from March 2022, which was four weeks after the review request, to remedy injustice caused by the unsuitable accommodation. It said it had considered:
• our Guidance on remedies, which suggests a range between £150 and £350 to remedy the injustice caused by unsuitable accommodation;
• the family were in overcrowded but not statutorily overcrowded accommodation (within the meaning of the Housing Act 1985);
• the family was not sharing facilities, such as a kitchen or bathroom, with other families;
• two family members have disabilities and the current housing adversely affected aspects of their daily living, although it accepted all family members were adversely affected.
8. Following communications with Mr X, the Council agreed to back-date the monthly payments to November 2021, the date of a Council letter to a councillor about the family’s overcrowded accommodation. It also confirmed it would continue to pay £150 per month, with payments made quarterly, until it had rehoused the family.
9. Mr X did not consider the payment was sufficient to remedy the injustice caused by the unsuitable temporary accommodation and said he did not consider it was in line with our Guidance on remedies.
10. Although the payment is at the lowest point of our usual scale, I do not consider there is sufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation. This is because the Council considered all relevant factors when deciding the appropriate level of payment. In addition, it has back-dated the payment to November 2021. If we had been in a position to make a recommendation about the payment when we made our original decision we would have started the payment from eight weeks after the review request in February 2022, which is the time within which councils should carry out a review. This means the Council has paid an extra five months at £150, which partly offsets the payment being at the lower end of the scale.
11. On balance, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in applying our Guidance on remedies to justify further investigation. Therefore, we will not investigate further.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to justify further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman