Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award another Discretionary Housing Payment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision not to award another Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP). He says he could not look for a smaller home due to the pandemic and the Council changed the information he provided about his finances. He wants the Council to award a backdated DHP.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes Mr X’s DHP applications, the complaint correspondence and the DHP policy. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. A DHP is a short-term measure to help people pay their rent. The policy says DHPs are intended to give people time to improve their housing circumstances so they can pay their rent without additional financial support.
5. The Council awarded two DHPs in 2020 but said further help would be dependent on Mr X registering for a smaller home as his current home is too large and expensive for his needs. Mr X applied for another DHP in 2021. The Council rejected the application because it calculated he now had enough income to pay the rent.
6. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The decision not to award another DHP is consistent with the policy. In addition, the Council had warned Mr X that his current accommodation is financially unsustainable and future awards would be dependent on him registering for a smaller and cheaper home. And, people were able to move house during the pandemic.
7. The Council explained to Mr X’s that his finances had improved, so he can now afford the rent, and it answered his questions about how it had treated part of his expenditure (for example his food costs) and how it had calculated his Personal Independent Payment.
8. We are not an appeal body and have no power to award a DHP. There is no reason to start an investigation because, while Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision, there is no suggestion of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman