Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment. This is because the Council has reduced the overpayment and the complainant has fresh appeal rights. In addition, there is insufficient injustice to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about a housing benefit overpayment and says the Council did not respond to her request for a review.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an investigation if we believe the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. The Social Entitlement Chamber (also known as the Social Security Appeal Tribunal) is a tribunal that considers housing benefit appeals. (The Social Entitlement Chamber of the First Tier Tribunal)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read the complaint and the housing benefit letters the Council sent to Ms X. I invited Ms X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Housing benefit decisions

6. If someone disagrees with a housing benefit decision they can ask for a review or appeal to the tribunal. If they have a review, and are unhappy with the decision, they can then appeal to the tribunal. The law says people should appeal within one month of the date of the decision they think is wrong.

What happened

7. In 2019 the Council asked Ms X to repay a housing benefit overpayment of £583. Ms X sent an email in October to dispute the overpayment. The Council did not do a review.
8. Ms X complained to the Ombudsman. In response to my enquiries the Council realised it had not responded to Ms X’s email. It reviewed the case in February and reduced the overpayment by about £116. It gave Ms X fresh appeal rights. Ms X still owes money to the Council.
9. Ms X thinks the overpayment has been caused by a Council error and wants the Council to write off the overpayment.

Assessment

10. The Council should have responded to Ms X’s email in October or November. However, this has not caused an injustice which requires an investigation. This is because the Council has now done a review and reduced the overpayment. But, the Council still says Ms X has to repay some money. If the Council had reviewed the case promptly Ms X would still be in the same position as now.
11. Ms X disputes the overpayment and may still dispute the revised overpayment. I will not investigate this issue because Ms X can use her appeal rights. She has until 24 March to appeal to the tribunal if she disputes the reduced overpayment demand. It is reasonable to expect Ms X to appeal because the tribunal is the appropriate body to consider housing benefit disputes.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice and because Ms X can appeal to the tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman