Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a letter the Council sent to the complainant in error about her housing benefit. This is because the Council has provided a fair and proportionate response.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about the Council’s response after it sent her a housing benefit letter in error. Ms X says the Council implied she had committed fraud. Ms X wants a meeting with the Council to discuss best practice.

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 the Council has provided a fair response. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and the letter the Council sent to Ms X in error. I considered our Assessment Code and invited Ms X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council was monitoring Ms X’s earnings for her housing benefit because there had been an overpayment earlier in the year caused by an increase in her wages. The Council reviewed the claim in June and wrote to Ms X to ask for proof of income. Unfortunately the Council used the wrong letter and wrongly said it had suspended the claim because there were concerns about changes in Ms X’s circumstances that could affect her entitlement to benefit. The Council asked Ms X to provide her wage slips within one month and said her claim could be cancelled if she did not provide the information.
5. Ms X provided her wage slips and complained because there had not been any changes in her circumstances.
6. The Council apologised and said it had sent the wrong letter. It explained it had not suspended the claim and the letter had wrongly referred to the claim being suspended. The Council said there was no intention to imply fraud. It said a warning letter is normally only sent if someone had not replied to a request for information. The Council said the letter was sent due to human error and it had reminded staff of the importance of sending the correct letter. The Council issued several apologies for the distress caused to Ms X.
7. I will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided a fair remedy. It has apologised, explained what went wrong, and reminded staff of the importance of sending correct letters. Once this remedy is taken into account there is not enough remaining injustice to require an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

8. I will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided a fair remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman