London Borough of Islington (22 010 622)
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council did not respond to an email. This is because the Council has provided a fair remedy.
The complaint
- The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council did not respond to an email and answer his questions.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- The Ombudsman investigates 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 an investigation if we decide the Council has already provided a fair remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
- Mr X sent an email to the Council in March about his housing benefit. He asked some questions and reported some changes in his circumstances. The Council did not respond to the email but it processed the information and sent new decision notices which showed the information had been assessed.
- Mr X sent more emails and reported more changes in his circumstances. During this year the Council has sent more replies, reassessed his claim and issued new decision notices. It answered the questions he had asked earlier in the year in November.
- In response to his complaint the Council apologised for the delays but also pointed out that much of the information he had requested had been provided in the new benefit decisions. The Council paid £175 compensation to Mr X.
- I will not start an investigation because the Council has already provided a fair remedy. It apologised for the delayed response, explained the benefit claim had been reassessed, paid compensation, and provided more information about Mr X’s overpayments. It would have been better if the Council had provided a swift response to the March email but it did reassess the benefit using the information provided. This represents a fair remedy and there is nothing more we would ask the Council to do.
Final decision
- We will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided a fair remedy.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman