Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council is paying his housing benefit direct to his landlord and failed to get his landlord to deal properly with anti social behaviour. The Council has not caused Mr X injustice. It has agreed with the Ombudsman that it will act to ensure that housing benefit decision letters clearly explain rights of appeal to an independent tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that in 2018 the Council decided to pay his housing benefit direct to his landlord. He says the Council was wrong to do so because he was not eight weeks in arrears as required by the benefit regulations. He says the Council relied on the landlord’s inaccurate fake information. He wants the Council to pay benefit direct to him.
2. Mr X complains the Council failed to intervene to ensure his landlord deals properly with anti social behaviour. Mr X says his landlord ignores tenant complaints, fails to follow its anti social behaviour policy, encourages vandalism and failed to repair damage caused by anti social behaviour. Mr X says he tried to influence the landlord to act properly by withholding rent payments.
3. Mr X complains the Council ignored or failed to reply properly to all his complaints and was ‘almost rude’.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• a fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

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

5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have considered Mr X’s information, comments and photographs. I have considered the complaint correspondence and considered the Council’s replies to my enquiry. Mr X has not replied to the draft decision statement I sent him. I have clarified the position with the Council and considered its comments.

Back to top

What I found

7. The Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 allow a Council to pay benefit direct to a landlord:
1. Regulation 95 says a council ‘shall’ pay benefit to the landlord where a claimant is 8 weeks or more in arrears.
2. Regulation 96 says a council ‘may’ pay benefit direct to the landlord where it considers ‘it is in the best interest of the claimant’ to do so.
8. On 4 October 2018 Mr X complained to the Council about its decision to pay housing benefit direct to the landlord. The Council replied saying the landlord had supplied a schedule showing the rent was 8 weeks in arrears. It invited Mr X to provide proof that he was not in arrears and it would reconsider the decision.
9. Mr X’s complaint also refers to an anti social behaviour problem from 2014. He says the property needed painting to correct some damage and he was withholding some rent from his landlord.
10. On 19 July 2019 the Council wrote to Mr X saying the rent is 102.38 per week and 8 weeks is £819.04. It invited Mr X to provide a rent schedule from his landlord showing that he is up to date with the rent. The Council says Mr X supplied the rent schedule dated 17 October 2019. This says rent is £101.36 per week and the arrears are £591.20. The period covered is between mid-August and Mid October 2019. On 9 September and 7 October the account was £895.28 in arrears which is over 8 weeks.
11. The Council tells me that Mr X could have appealed its decision to the first tier Tribunal. It says it paid the landlord due to the arrears being over 95 weeks (regulation 95) and now considers, under regulation 96, that it is in Mr X’s best interest. It is not clear from the Council’s letters whether Mr X was notified his rights of appeal. I have raised this with the Council which says appeal rights are usually on the reverse of decision letters. It will review automatically generated letters to ensure that correct rights of appeal are given.
12. Mr X has told this office that the Housing Ombudsman has provided ‘a solution’ to a question he raised about the landlord.

Analysis

I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons:

13. The Ombudsman investigates fault causing injustice. I consider the Council has not caused Mr X injustice by paying the landlord direct. The information from October 2019 shows Mr X had significant rent arrears (see paragraph 7 and 10 above).
14. Actions before the 6 December 2018 are outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction on the 12 month rule because Mr X complains late (see paragraph 5). This includes the Council’s original decision to pay housing benefit to the landlord, which Mr X knew about by October 2018, and the history of anti social behaviour. I will not exercise discretion to investigate because Mr X could have complained to this office sooner.
15. Mr X’s complaint about his private social landlord and tenancy related actions are outside the jurisdiction of this office. The Housing Ombudsman deals with such complaints and Mr X has contacted them.
16. Mr X has not provided evidence of the Council failing to deal with anti social behaviour in the last 12 months or that a problem continues. I understand by late 2018 the outstanding issue was external repairs or painting which Mr X wanted his landlord to do. I have not seen evidence suggesting the Council could or should have been involved
17. There is no reason to investigate the complaint handling. The 2018 complaint reply should have told, or remind, Mr X that he had a right of appeal to the Social Security Tribunal against the decision to pay housing benefit direct to his landlord. However, I do not consider that omission caused Mr X an injustice given the level of his arrears. The complaint replies are not rude and in 2019 the Council correctly advised Mr X he could complain to this office.

Back to top

Final decision

18. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council is paying his housing benefit direct to his landlord and failed to get his landlord to deal properly with anti social behaviour. The Council has not caused Mr X an injustice. It has agreed with the Ombudsman that it will act to ensure all housing benefit decision letters clearly explain rights of appeal to an independent tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman