Summary: Mr B complained about the Council’s handling of housing benefit payments for the tenant of a property he owns. He also complained about the actions of the Council’s officers who he considered encouraged the tenant to deny access to the property. He said the Council did not respond to his correspondence and his requests for redress. He said that as a result he incurred costs and did not receive the housing benefit payments he should. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mr B. The Council will make a small further payment to him.

The complaint

1. I call the complainant Mr B. He complained about the Council’s handling of housing benefit payments for the tenant of a property he owns. He also complained about the actions of the Council’s officers who he considered encouraged the tenant to deny access to the property for him and his contractors. He said the Council did not respond to his correspondence and his requests for redress. He said that as a result he incurred costs and did not receive the housing benefit payments he should.

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’. 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)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. I considered the complaint and documents provided by Mr B and spoke to him I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information. I sent a draft of this statement to Mr B and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr B owns a property which is rented to a tenant. There were two main strands to the complaint. The first related to payments of housing benefit. The second to the Council’s involvement in works needed to the property.

Housing benefit

7. The tenant, who I will call Mr X, was receiving housing benefit. In 2018 Mr B increased the rent by £100 a month. As I understand it Mr X did not pay the increased rent because he considered there were repairs needed at the property.
8. In May 2019 Mr B told the Council the tenant was in arrears from November 2018 so the Council started to pay the housing benefit directly to him. However it did not pay it at the increased level. In January 2020 it realised it had not actioned the increase and did so by making a payment to Mr B. This covered the entire period from November 2018 when Mr B said the arrears started. Later, it also paid him £25 in recognition of its error.
9. If a tenant owes over eight week’s rent then payment can be made direct to the landlord. When the Council agreed to pay Mr B direct Mr X’s arrears were not at that level so the Council should not have started to pay Mr B direct. But that did not cause Mr B any detriment, so I am not taking that point further.
10. Mr B considered the Council had not paid the correct amount of housing benefit and there was a shortfall of just over £600 relating to 2019 and 2020. Mr B provided a spreadsheet which he considered showed this shortfall. In commenting on the draft of this statement Mr B said there were also earlier arrears from 2018 of £1100. The basis of Mr B’s position appeared to be that he considered the housing benefit should be more than the amount the Council calculated but he provided no evidence for his view. Mr B cannot know what Mr X’s entitlement to housing benefit was as this would depend on his circumstances and could change.
11. There is no evidence of any shortfall in the benefit paid direct to Mr B.

Access to the property

12. In 2019 the Council took action in respect of the condition of the property and repairs needed. Mr B complained that officers of the Council told Mr X to withhold part of his rent and not to allow Mr B access to the property. Mr B said he had messages from Mr X confirming this. Mr B has not provided copies of those messages to the Council, or to me.
13. The Council said that officers have not made any such suggestions to Mr X. They have encouraged him to allow access and have attempted to facilitate that with Mr B.
14. There is no evidence to support the complaint that officers acted improperly in their contact with the tenant.

Other matters

Police involvement

15. In the correspondence about the work needed to the property in 2019 Mr B said he had referred the matter to the police and provided a reference number.
16. The Council said it had no approach from the police and had tried to identify the reference number. The response it received from the police was that it didn’t match their logging system.
17. There is no evidence of any fault by the Council.

Correspondence and complaint handling

18. The Council first responded formally to a complaint from Mr B in December 2019. That was about the disrepair issues and not about housing benefit. There was then some further correspondence between Mr B and the officer but he did not ask for the complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the complaint process. In late January 2020 the Council responded on the housing benefit issues. It was at this point that it backdated the increased housing benefit entitlement to November 2018.
19. In February 2020 Mr B sent what he termed a financial demand to the Council. In this he referred to sums he said were due to him from the Council including over £7,000 for outstanding housing benefit, bank charges and loss of interest payments; £10,000 for emotional distress and £10,000 in legal fees. He said the Council had 14 days to settle the demand.
20. Mr B chased the Council about this over March and in early April he logged a formal complaint. The Council responded in mid-May. It acknowledged it failed to log the rent increase and offered a payment of £25. Mr B remained dissatisfied with the response and continued to contact the Council. The Council said its complaint process was completed and he should complain to us.
21. There was some further contact from Mr B with the Council about payment for a licence and a discretionary housing payment over the next few months. Mr B made a further complaint in November but the Council said this was all related to the same matters and he should approach us – which he did in December 2020. There was no fault in how the Council responded to Mr B’s complaints.
22. Mr B complained the Council repeatedly failed to respond to his emails. In terms of the housing repairs issues that is not case. Generally officers replied to the substantive issues within a reasonable time. I do not have copies of all of Mr B’s correspondence with the housing benefit team but there is accepted fault in not actioning the increase in rent when the decision was made in May 2019 to pay Mr B direct. The Council paid Mr B £25 to acknowledge that failing but a total payment of £100 would be appropriate given the time taken to remedy it.

Back to top

Agreed action

23. The Council will, within a month of the final decision, pay Mr B £75.

Back to top

Final decision

24. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mr B.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman