Torbay Council (19 010 986)

Category : Benefits and tax > Housing benefit and council tax benefit

Decision : Not upheld

Decision date : 01 Apr 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of her housing benefit overpayment recovery. She also complains about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application. The Ombudsman finds no fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

  1. Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of housing benefit overpayment recovery. She says the Council wrote to her in January 2018 to advise her it was deducting £100 a month from her housing benefit to recover overpaid housing benefit. Ms X said she asked the Council to reduce the deduction to £5 a week because she was not working. She says the Council agreed to do so. Ms X said she found out in January 2019 the Council had not reduced the deductions. This led to her accruing rent arrears.
  2. Ms X also complains about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application.

Back to top

What I have investigated

  1. Ms X also had complaints about the actions of her housing association and the information provided to her when she moved on to Universal Credit. I have not investigated these complaints as they are outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
  2. I have referred Ms X to the correct organisations to bring those complaints to.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
  2. 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

  1. I spoke with Ms X and considered the information she provided.
  2. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
  3. I sent a draft decision to Ms X and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

Benefit Overpayments

  1. If a council reviews a claim and decides it has paid too much benefit, this is an overpayment.
  2. Councils can recover an overpayment from the claimant or the person to whom it made the overpayment, for example the claimant’s landlord if a council has made a direct payment. The person from whom the authority decides to recover an overpayment can appeal.
  3. The Department for Work and Pensions publishes a Housing Benefit overpayments guide. Paragraphs 4.240-4.243 says it is good practice to not start recovery until the end of the one-month appeal period. Recovery action should also be suspended if a claimant appeals.

Homelessness

  1. If someone is homeless, or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, they can seek help from the housing authority.
  2. If a housing authority has reason to believe a person may be homeless, eligible, and in priority need, then it must provide interim accommodation for them. A person may be in priority need if they are pregnant or have dependent children, aged 16 or 17, former care leavers aged 18 to 20, or vulnerable.
  3. Section 189B of the Housing Act 1996 (inserted by the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017) sets out that where the local housing authority is satisfied that an applicant is homeless and eligible for assistance, it is subject to a duty to take reasonable steps to help the applicant secure accommodation that will be available for at least six months. This is known as the relief duty.
  4. When any of the below circumstances occur, the housing authority may give notice to end the relief duty:
  • The applicant has suitable accommodation available that has a reasonable prospect of being available for at least six months.
  • 56 days have passed since the authority became subject to this duty, whether or not the applicant has secured accommodation.
  • The applicant has refused an offer of suitable accommodation that would have been available for at least six months.
  • The applicant has become intentionally homeless from any accommodation that was made available by the authority exercising functions under section 189B.
  • The applicant is no longer eligible.
  • The applicant has withdrawn the application.
  1. When the housing authority is satisfied the applicant has a priority need and is unintentionally homeless, the relief duty will come to an end after 56 days.
  2. The homelessness code of guidance notes housing authorities should not have a blanket policy of ending the relief duty after 56 days where they have the discretion to continue it. Instead, they should take the applicant’s circumstances into account in each case. (Homelessness code of guidance for local authorities, paragraph 14.17)
  3. The guidance also notes that during the relief stage, where an applicant does not have a priority need or they have priority need and have become homeless intentionally, the authority may want to consider continuing the relief duty for longer. (Homelessness code of guidance for local authorities, paragraph 14.19)
  4. When the relief period ends the housing authority must decide whether it owes the person the main housing duty. If homelessness is not successfully prevented or relieved, a housing authority will owe the main housing duty (section 193(2) of the Housing Act 1996) to applicants who are eligible, have a priority need for accommodation, and are not homeless intentionally.
  5. Under the main housing duty, housing authorities must ensure that suitable accommodation is available for the applicant and their household until the duty is brought to an end, usually through the offer of a settled home.

What happened

  1. In January 2018, Ms X said the Council told her it had overpaid her housing benefit. The Council was deducting just over £23 a week from Ms X’s housing benefit to recover the overpayment. The Council later reduced this to just over £16 a week.
  2. Ms X said she asked the Council to reduce the deductions to the minimum possible in January 2018. She said the Council gave her some forms to complete. Ms X said she completed the forms and returned them to the Council.
  3. In February 2018, Ms X contacted the Council and informed it she could not work because of a recent bereavement. The Council sent her a form to complete which the Council would use to see if the recovery rates could be reduced. The Council said Ms X had previously completed one of these forms in January 2018, where she requested to pay £5 a fortnight, but this was in relation to her council tax debt.
  4. The Council wrote to Ms X near the end of February 2018 to confirm it had reduced the housing benefit deduction to £5 a week.
  5. The Council deducted £20 every month from Ms X’s housing benefit payment. This was done for two months.
  6. In April 2018, Ms X told the Council she had started work on 12 March 2018. The Council reassessed Ms X’s housing benefit to include her new earnings. The Council identified an overpayment and told Ms X of the amount it would deduct each week from her housing benefit payment to recover this overpayment. The amount was just over £23 a week. Ms X did not contact the Council following this change and did not ask the Council to lower the deduction.
  7. In October 2018, Ms X moved onto Universal Credit. In November 2018, Ms X was told by her housing association she was in arrears.
  8. In February 2019, Ms X’s housing association started the process of repossessing the property. Ms X made a homeless application to the Council. The Council made two appointments with Ms X to discuss her housing situation, but Ms X cancelled these appointments.
  9. At the end of March 2019, Ms X contacted the Council to advise she was homeless. The Council accepted it owed Ms X the relief duty and placed her in interim accommodation.
  10. In April 2019, the Council asked Ms X to provide information so that it could assess her homelessness application. At the end of April 2019, the Council told Ms X it was minded to find she was intentionally homeless.
  11. At the end of June 2019, the Council wrote to Ms X to tell her it had ended its relief duty because 56 days had passed since the duty was accepted. The Council also decided she was intentionally homeless and not owed the main housing duty. Ms X asked for a review of the decision in July 2019.
  12. The Council completed its review in August 2019. The Council overturned its original decision that Ms X was intentionally homeless. The Council sent Ms X’s case back to a housing officer for further investigation. The Council placed Ms X in interim accommodation while it considered whether it owed Ms X the main housing duty.
  13. At the end of September 2019, the Council accepted it owed Ms X the main housing duty. The Council provided Ms X with temporary accommodation.
  14. In November 2019, the Council discharged its housing duty towards Ms X. The Council told Ms X about her right to request a review of its decision. Ms X did not ask for a review.

Analysis

Housing benefit overpayment deduction

  1. It is clear from the evidence the Council told Ms X it had overpaid her housing benefit. The Council also told Ms X it would reclaim the overpayment by making deductions to her housing benefit payments.
  2. Ms X said she had asked the Council to reduce the deductions to the minimum possible in January 2018. The evidence shows Ms X had requested £5 a fortnight, but it appears the request was made in relation to her council tax debt, rather than her housing benefit overpayment. In any case, the Council considered her request and reduced the deductions in February 2018. The deductions were backdated to January 2018.
  3. The evidence shows the Council deducted £5 a week from Ms X’s housing benefit payment for two months. While the recovery rate was more than what Ms X offered, I do not find fault with the Council’s actions. This is because I am satisfied the Council considered Ms X’s financial circumstances before setting the recovery rate.
  4. In April 2018, the Council received information from Ms X that she had started work in March 2018. The Council reassessed her benefits to include her new earnings and identified it had overpaid Ms X housing benefit. The Council told Ms X in April 2019 it would recover the overpayment through weekly deductions of just over £23 a month.
  5. The evidence shows Ms X did not respond to this letter, nor did she ask the Council to reduce the deduction amount. While it is clear the deduction amount went up, the Council notified Ms X of this change. Ms X had the opportunity to ask the Council to reduce the deductions but did not do so. Therefore, I do not find fault with the Council’s actions because it could not have known Ms X was struggling with the deduction amount.

Homelessness application

  1. The evidence shows the Council has acted in line with legislation and guidance with regards to Ms X’s homeless application.
  2. The Council accepted it owed Ms X the relief duty in March 2019 and placed her in interim accommodation. This was in line with legislation.
  3. The Council ended its relief duty at the end of June 2019. This was around 93 days after the Council first accepted the relief duty. Again, I consider this to be in line with legislation and guidance because the Council may bring the relief duty to an end after 56 days. The Council also made a final decision on the main housing duty on the same day it ended its relief duty. This was in line with legislation.
  4. The Council told Ms X of her right to request a review of its decision and Ms X exercised this right. Following the review, the Council overturned its original decision that Ms X was intentionally homeless. The Council accepted it did owe Ms X the main housing duty in September 2019 and provided Ms X with temporary accommodation. These actions were all in line with legislation and guidance.
  5. The Council discharged its main housing duty in November 2019. The Council provided its reasons for doing so and told Ms X of her right to ask for a review of the decision. This was in line with legislation.
  6. Therefore, I do not find fault with the Council’s handling of Ms X’s homelessness application.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I find no fault with the Council’s handling of housing benefit overpayment recovery. I also find no fault with its handling of Ms X’s homelessness application. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings