Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment because the complainants could have appealed to the tribunal.

The complaint

1. The complainants, whom I refer to as Mr & Mrs X, complain the Council has asked them to repay housing benefit overpayments for a house they left in 2018. They say they should not have to repay the overpayments because their Housing Association told them they did not owe any money.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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 decision letters from 2016 and 2017. I considered letters the Council sent to Mr & Mrs X in 2020. I invited Mr & Mrs X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Housing benefit

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 2016 and 2017 the Council issued several housing benefit overpayment letters. The letters explained Mr & Mrs X’s appeal rights. The Council ended the benefit claim in May 2017. Mr & Mrs X had not repaid the overpayment or appealed.
8. Mr & Mrs X moved in October 2018. The Housing Association told them they did not owe any money.
9. In 2020 the Council traced Mr & Mrs X and in March asked them to pay the outstanding invoices. Mr & Mrs X sent an email disputing the debt and asking for a payment plan. The Council did not reply until October when it summarised what had happened, said they owe £1817, and invited a payment plan.

Assessment

10. I will not start an investigation because Mr & Mrs X could have used their appeal rights for each overpayment decision. They needed to have appealed, in 2016 and 2017, within a month of each decision being notified. It is reasonable to expect them to have appealed because the tribunal is the appropriate body to consider appeals about housing benefit decisions. The tribunal would have decided if they had to repay any money.
11. The information from the Housing Association that Mr & Mrs X did not owe any money would only have related to whether they owed money to the Housing Association. The Housing Association would not have known if Mr & Mrs X owed money to the Council.
12. It would have been better if the Council had responded to Mr & Mrs X in March. But, the delay has not had an impact because the housing benefit decisions were made in 2016 and 2017 and the Council has now invited Mr & Mrs X to make a payment plan.

Back to top

Final decision

13. I will not start an investigation because the complainants could have appealed to the tribunal about each overpayment decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman