Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council pursuing the complainant for an alleged housing benefit overpayment. This is because we do not usually investigate complaints when a complainant could have appealed to a tribunal. We also do not usually look into complaints about events that took place more than 12 months ago when the complainant ought reasonably to have been aware they had a reason to complain.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Miss A, is unhappy with the way the Council has processed a housing benefits claim. Miss A believes this led to her being wrongfully evicted from her home in 2013. Miss A believes the Council is now pursuing her to recover overpayments she never received.

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. 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

5. I considered information provided by Miss A and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. Miss A responded to a draft decision and I considered all of her points before making this final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss A disagrees with the way the Council has calculated her housing benefit. She feels she did not receive what she was entitled to previously and the Council is now pursuing her for overpayments she did not receive.
8. In the letters the Council sent Miss A to notify her of the debt it believed she owed, it explained she could appeal against the decision to the Social Security Appeal Tribunal.
9. We will not normally investigate complaints about housing benefit overpayments and decisions where a complainant could have appealed to the Tribunal.
10. It is reasonable to expect Miss A to use the Tribunal because it is free to use and the appropriate body to consider benefit disputes. Miss A has said she already had representation from a solicitor but this does not affect her appeal rights.
11. Miss A has raised concerns about her eviction in 2013 as she says she was not receiving a housing benefit entitlement at that time. It is not usual for us to investigate a complaint where the complainant has been aware of the issues for more than 12 months. If Miss A felt she was not receiving the housing benefit she was entitled to prior to her eviction, she would have needed to raise this complaint sooner.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I have decided we should not investigate this complaint. This is because Miss A could have appealed to the Tribunal against any decision on her housing benefit entitlement or that there had been a recoverable overpayment. If Miss A felt she should have been receiving housing benefit in 2013, this is a complaint she should have raised at the time.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman