Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the complainant’s benefit claims since 2016. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because part of the complaint is late.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about the way the Council has handled her benefit claims since 2016. She has accused one officer (officer A) of misconduct in public office. Ms X wants the Council to acknowledge gross misconduct by officer A, apologise, pay compensation, and offer a meeting with the chief executive.

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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. 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

4. I considered information provided by Ms X. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X applied for housing benefit in 2016. Officer A decided she was not eligible. A different officer did a review and agreed Ms X was not eligible. Ms X appealed. In January 2018 the tribunal upheld the appeal and decided Ms X was entitled to housing benefit. Unfortunately, Ms X was evicted from the property in 2017. Ms X blames officer A for the loss of her home. Officer A had virtually no involvement with Ms X’s claims from 2018 to 2020.
6. In February 2020 Ms X applied for a discretionary housing payment (DHP) for help with a deposit. A computer error meant there was a 12 day delay in the claim being scanned onto the system. Officer A contacted the estate agent to ask for information. The Council refused the DHP on 9 March because the estate agent had reported that Ms X had paid the deposit and moved in.
7. Ms X asked for a review and complained about officer A. She said the officer’s contact with the estate agent had been inappropriate. Ms X explained she had borrowed the money for the deposit.
8. The Council reviewed the DHP claim and made an award on 11 March. It explained officer A had contacted the estate agent to confirm the moving in date for council tax and to ask for information for the DHP. The Council said the decisions made by officer A had been justified and based on the evidence. It said the Council could have sought clarification from Ms X before making the decision. The Council has changed its procedures so more calls are made to gather information before making a decision.
9. I will not investigate the decision to refuse housing benefit in 2016 because it is a late complaint. The Council made the decision in 2016 and it was reversed by the tribunal in 2018. But, Ms X did not complain to us until September 2021.
10. I will not investigate the decision to refuse the DHP because there is insufficient evidence of fault. It is not wrong for an officer to seek information in relation to a benefit claim. Ms X says the Council’s call to the estate agent was a data breach. Ms X can take that as a complaint to the Information Commissioner. Ms X disagreed with the DHP decision but she successfully asked for a review and the decision was reversed in two days. This shows the process is effective and the Council has already made changes to the way it handles claims.
11. Ms X is critical of officer A. However, we investigate the actions of the Council as a body. If Ms X wants to pursue a complaint of misconduct in public office, then she would need to take legal action.
12. Ms X says the actions of officer A indicate widespread failures within the Council’s benefits team. For example, she has complained of inaccurate benefit decisions and poor use of resources. Ms X says we would find many faults if we started an investigation. However, we investigate specific complaints of fault causing injustice and, for benefit decisions, we expect people to use their review rights. We are not auditors or a regulator and we do not go into council departments to assess how they function. And, in terms of specific complaints, I have explained why we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

13. I will not investigate this complaint because part of the complaint is late and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman