Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council wrongly pursuing Mrs Y for housing benefit overpayments. That is because further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained on behalf of her mother, Mrs Y. She said the Council had harassed Mrs Y for council tax, that she did not owe. She said the Council had accepted there was an error in its computer system in 2017 however, had delayed until 2022 in resolving this; that meant it continued to chase Mrs Y for money. She said that resulted in Mrs Y having to pay court costs.
2. Miss X wants the Council to financially compensate Mrs Y for the time and trouble she has spent chasing them; to explain why the Council started to ask for payments and payback any money it owes to Mrs Y. She is also unhappy in how the Council has dealt with her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. In the Council’s complaint response, it said it identified an error in its software in 2017. That resulted in the Council incorrectly thinking it had overpaid Mrs Y housing benefit since 2013. The Council accepted it had delayed in resolving the issue and offered to pay Mrs Y £150 to remedy the avoidable time and distress its actions had caused. It also offered to reimburse the court costs. The Council provided information to Miss X about the council tax Mrs Y had paid; it said it had not received any housing benefit payments.
7. Although Miss X is unhappy with the Council’s response we will not investigate further. That is because the Council has offered a financial remedy in line with the Ombudsman Guidance on Remedies, for the avoidable distress caused; therefore, further investigation will not lead to a different outcome. It has also reimbursed the court costs. Although Miss X believes the Council might owe Mrs Y money, the Council said it has not received housing benefit payments. Therefore, there is nothing to suggest there is any outstanding injustice to Mrs Y that requires further investigation.
8. Miss X is also unhappy in how the Council has dealt with her complaint. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures when we are not investigating the substantive matter, therefore we will not investigate this further.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman