Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council asked the complainant for unnecessary information for his housing benefit claim. This is because the Council has provided a fair response and there is not enough injustice to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains he was inconvenienced and stressed because the Council asked him to provide unnecessary information for his housing benefit claim. Mr X wants compensation and for staff to be trained.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• 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 Mr X and the Council. This includes the letter the Council sent to Mr X asking for audited accounts. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council asked Mr X to provide audited accounts for his housing benefit claim. It explained that it is easier for officers to assess audited accounts and information provided in different formats might lead to errors. It said it is reasonable to expect that an established company would have audited accounts. Mr X provided all the required information but in a different format. Mr X complained about being asked to provide audited accounts.
5. The Council apologised and said it should have made it clear that he could provide the information in a different format. It said his housing benefit had been reassessed and the request for audited accounts had not caused a delay. The Council said managers had been informed for staff training and feedback.
6. I will not start an investigation because the Council has provided a fair response. It has apologised and agreed the request failed to make it clear that Mr X could provide the information in a different format. It also explained that staff would be made aware for training purposes. And, the Council had already explained why it prefers to receive audited accounts. This is a fair and proportionate response and, as there was not impact on the claim, there is not enough injustice to require an investigation. I appreciate Mr X feels frustrated at being asked to provide information he cannot provide but this does not represent a degree of injustice that requires an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

7. I will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided a fair response and there is not enough injustice to require an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman