Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s decision not to award her discretionary housing payment in 2018. We should not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint. This is because it was received outside the normal 12-month timescale for submitting complaints. There are no good reasons to exercise discretion to accept it now because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council rejecting her application for discretionary housing payment (DHP)in 2018. She says she submitted further information and had reviews and the Council awarded DHP from November 2019. She wants the Council to backdate the payment to 2018 but it says she did not qualify at that time.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered all the information which Miss X submitted with her complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response. Miss X has been given an opportunity to comment on a draft copy of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Miss X complained about the Council rejecting her application for DHP in 2018 when she became redundant and lost her income. The Council says she informed it of varying income details in 2019 when she was a student and later when the course ended. The Council decided to approve DHP payments from let 2019 following the introduction of the benefit cap which affected her universal credit. The Council told her in 2019 that it would not allow her earlier claim for the benefit and there was no right of appeal following a review.
6. We do not normally consider complaints about matters which the complainant was aware of more than 12 months before they submitted a complaint to us. Miss X was aware the DHP claim was rejected in 2018. The Council confirmed it would not review the matter further in 2019 and it was reasonable for her to complain to us by then. We have discretion to disapply the 12-month rule if we consider there are good reasons. We should not investigate this complaint because it is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to accept it now.
7. We cannot overturn a council’s decision on a discretionary benefit on the basis that the complainant disagrees with it. She could only do this by way of judicial review if she believed the Council had acted unlawfully and the Council advised her of this in 2019.

Back to top

Final

8. We should not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint. This is because it was received outside the normal 12-month timescale for submitting complaints. There are no good reasons to exercise discretion to accept it now because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman