Summary: We will not investigate this housing benefit complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, it is a late complaint and because there were appeal rights the complainant could have used. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council owes him housing benefit from 2017. He wants the Council to pay the housing benefit and stop pursuing him for an overpayment.

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:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• 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)
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 read the complaint and correspondence between Mr X and the Council. I considered comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

7. Mr X claimed housing benefit and Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) from April 2017. He went to Scotland where he had a heart attack and was ill for some time. His JSA claim ended because he did not sign-on. The Council then cancelled his housing benefit.
8. In September and October the Council sent letters to his home address, and to his Scotland address, explaining it had ended the claim and he needed to repay £317. The letters explained his appeal rights. Mr X returned to his home address for a short time in early October before moving to Scotland.
9. Mr X contacted the Council in April 2018. He referred to being told about the overpayment a few months ago. He explained he had been ill which was why the claim had lapsed. The Council replied in June 2018. It asked him to provide some information so it could see if it could reduce the overpayment and/or award housing benefit until October 2017. Mr X did not provide the information the Council asked for. Mr X says he did not receive the letter.
10. Mr X contacted the Council again in March 2020. The Council re-sent the June 2018 letter and said he had not provided the information requested. It said it had been unable to look again at the benefit decisions because he had not responded to the letter. It explained it was now too late to appeal against any of the benefit decisions. Mr X responded in March 2020 to repeat that he does not owe the overpayment and to say the Council owes him housing benefit from August to October 2017.
11. Mr X’s wife paid the overpayment in March 2020. However, the debt collector sent letters about it in December. The Council confirmed to me that Mr X has paid the overpayment and he does not owe any money. The Council also told me that, following the email exchange in March 2020, Mr X had not provided the information requested in 2018.
12. Mr X continues to dispute the overpayment and says the Council owes him benefit from August to October 2017.

Assessment

13. I will not start an investigation for the following reasons.
14. This is a late complaint. Mr X has known since 2018, and possibly 2017, that the Council had ended his claim and raised an overpayment. But he did not complain to us until December 2020. I have not seen any good reason to accept such a late complaint.
15. It is correct that the debt collector contacted Mr X in December so that issue is not late. But, the Council has confirmed this debt has been paid and Mr X did not pay any more than the amount of the overpayment. This issue has not caused enough injustice to require an investigation and the dispute about the overpayment is late because Mr X has known about it since at least 2018.
16. I also will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. It notified Mr X of the benefit decisions, provided appeal rights and offered to review the decisions in 2018 if Mr X provided more information. Mr X has not provided the information the Council needed so it could not do a review. The Council has also confirmed that the overpayment has been paid and Mr X does not owe any money.
17. Finally, Mr X could have appealed to the tribunal if he disagreed with the benefit decisions. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to have appealed because the tribunal is the appropriate body to consider benefit disputes. In addition, the Council sent decisions, with appeal rights, to Mr X’s home address during the period when he said he had returned home. Mr X says the Council neither notified him that the claim had been ended nor notified him of his appeal rights. But, the Council wrote to both addresses in October 2017 so, on balance, I am satisfied it did tell him about the end of the claim and his appeal rights.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I will not start an investigation because this is a late complaint, Mr X could have used his appeal rights and there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman