Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s delay in paying her tenant’s housing benefit direct to her after the rent account became more than 8 weeks in arrears. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has paid the overdue benefit, and this is a reasonable remedy to her complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, complains about the Council delaying paying housing benefit direct to her as a landlord following her tenant failing to pay her rent for a period of 8 weeks. She says that she lost the 8 weeks rent and the subsequent payments before the Council changed to direct payments.

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 provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions a council has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mrs X submitted with her complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response. Mrs X has commented on a copy of my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs X is a landlord of a property where the tenant was receiving housing benefit payments. In 2019 the tenant failed to pay her rent for a period of 8 weeks even though she was in receipt of housing benefit. The law allows for landlords to apply to councils to pay housing benefit directly to them once a tenant is more than 8 weeks in arrears.
5. Mrs X emailed the Council about her tenant. The Council says she did not make a request for direct payments to be made and did not send a statement of the rent account showing how much in arrears the tenant was. Mrs X subsequently complained about the Council’s delay which resulted in the tenant receiving two further benefit payments after her email.
6. The Council acknowledged that it should have suspended the payments to the tenant until it could receive the required additional information from Mrs X. It should also have advised her how to make a formal request for the payments to be made direct.
7. The Council refunded Mrs X the two payments which it made to the tenant following the 8-week period. It cannot refund her for the payments during the first 8 weeks of arrears on the account because the law does not allow for this. Even if the Council had acted promptly in suspending the account, Mrs X as landlord would be normally be responsible for recovering the first 8 weeks payment from her tenant.
8. I consider the Council’s decision to make the additional payments a reasonable remedy to any injustice caused by its initial delay.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has paid the overdue benefit, and this is a reasonable remedy to her complaint.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman