Summary: Mr X complains the Council was at fault in the way it dealt with his applications for a Discretionary Housing Payment. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered these matters.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall refer to as Mr X complains there were failings in the way the Council considered his applications for a Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP). He says a council officer promised he would receive the DHP. So, the decision to refuse his applications caused him distress due to his financial and personal circumstances.

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 cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council has provided; and
• given the Council and the complainant the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Discretionary Housing Payments Guidance Manual, issued by the Department for Work and Pensions, says that a DHP may be awarded when a council considers a claimant requires further financial assistance towards housing costs and is entitled to either Housing Benefit or Universal Credit with housing costs towards rental liability.
6. The manual also says that:

“In relation to preventing duplication of provision, part of the decision states ‘housing benefit already paid for past housing costs must also be deducted.’ This is implicit in the purpose for which DHP’s may be made. Otherwise the applicant would be receiving DHP’s for housing costs that have already been met by past payment of housing costs/benefit. It would not be a case for a need for ‘further’ financial assistance to meet ‘housing costs’.”

7. When someone applies for a DHP they must provide details of their income, capital, expenditure and any other information the council considers reasonably necessary.
8. The Council’s DHP policy says that to qualify for a DHP the applicant must have a rent liability, need further financial assistance with their housing costs and be in receipt of Housing Benefit (HB) or Universal Credit Housing Costs (UCHC) element.
9. The Council also administers an Exceptional Hardship Payment (EHP) as help towards Council Tax. In the Council’s area all working age residents must pay a minimum 20% Council Tax charge.
10. DHP and EHP are both discretionary funds and are separate from the Housing Benefit and Council Tax Support schemes.

Background to the complaint

11. Mr X lived in housing association property. He says he was suffering financially due to losing his job and mentally with anxiety and depression. He wanted to move to different accommodation due to medical reasons and asked the Council and the housing association for help. Mr X says a council officer helped him with a housing application and promised he would receive a DHP to help him with his rent arrears. This would help Mr X to move accommodation sooner. Mr X applied for Universal Credit (UC) from the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP).
12. Mr X applied to the Council for a DHP and an EHP while waiting for a decision on his UC application. The Council considered and refused the application as Mr X was not receiving UCHC or HB which was needed to qualify. The Council sent Mr X a letter to explain its decision and advised he could reapply when he was awarded UCHC or HB.
13. Mr X was awarded UC and applied for a DHP again. The Council considered the application. Mr X gave a different address outside the area and failed to complete the payment frequencies section on the form. An officer tried to contact Mr X unsuccessfully to check whether he was resident in the area and provide the payment information. The officer contacted the Housing Association for information on Mr X’s rent arrears.
14. The Housing Association provided the information. Mr X also confirmed he was resident in the area but did not send the payment information, so his application remained as pending.
15. Mr X sent the information a few weeks later. An officer assessed the application and saw the UCHC awarded was the same as Mr X’s weekly rent. The Council refused Mr X’s application again as Mr X was receiving his full housing costs from UC so there was no shortfall in his rent. If the Council made a DHP Mr X would be receiving a second payment for his rent for the same period. This was contrary to the DHP Manual.
16. The Council sent Mr X a letter to explain the decision. It also advised it could not pay for any rent arrears accrued before Mr X received UC. This was because it could only make payments for rent arrears if they were accrued while the claimant was receiving HB or UCHC payments. The Council refused Mr X’s EHP request.
17. Mr X appealed the decision. The Council confirmed there were no appeal rights but agreed to review the decision. The Council decided to uphold its decision not to award Mr X a DHP. It said Mr X had not been receiving UCHC or HB, there was no rent shortfall and he already had the money from UC for the arrears period. The Council did agree to award Mr X an EHP of £140.18 to cover his 20% Council Tax charge due to being on low income.
18. The Council confirms the officer Mr X spoke to did not say he would get help from the DHP fund but just advised Mr X he could apply. The officer confirms he does not offer any guarantee an award would be made as it is dealt with by a different team who administer the fund.

Analysis

19. The Council did not award Mr X a DHP as he was not receiving UCHC or HB when he first applied. The Council did not award Mr X a DHP with his second application as he did not have a rent shortfall due to receiving UC. It could not pay Mr X a DHP for his rent arrears as he was not receiving HB or UC when they occurred. I am satisfied the Council properly followed its policy and government guidance when it reached its decision to not award Mr X a DHP. There is no evidence of fault here.
20. The officer has denied advising Mr X he would receive a DHP. As there is no independent corroboration of the conversation, I do not consider this is an issue I can resolve.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I am completing my investigation. I have found no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s applications for a DHP.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman