Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award a 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 Ms X, complains about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for a Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP). She says it ignored her evidence that she can afford the property. Ms X wants the Council to pay the full bond and other costs she incurred.

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 Ms X and the Council. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Councils can award a DHP. A DHP is discretionary and nobody has the right to a DHP. The Council can award a DHP for a bond or rent in advance. When the Council assesses an application it will consider the financial circumstances of the applicant and whether the tenancy would be sustainable.
5. Ms X applied for a DHP on 31 August for a bond of £1600. The tenancy was due to start on 3 September and was for a property in a different council area. The Council considered the rent, benefit payable, and Ms X’s finances. The Council refused the application on 2 September because the assessment showed the property was unaffordable.
6. Ms X asked for a review. She said she would speak to her employer about increasing her hours and try to reduce her petrol costs. The Council reviewed her circumstances but again decided the property is unaffordable. It noted the rent is more than the maximum benefit level and it cannot take into account financial changes that might happen in the future. It also said that as she was moving to a different council area there was no guarantee the other council would help with the shortfall between the rent and benefit. The Council was aware Ms X had declined an offer of social housing which would have been more affordable. The Council confirmed the decision on 3 September.
7. While the Council was doing the review Ms X said she had already paid the £1600 bond. The Council said it could not pay a DHP for a bond that had already been paid. However, as paying the bond had caused financial difficulty, the Council offered a DHP of £800. Ms X declined the award as she wants the full amount.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council assessed the application without delay but, having considered all the relevant factors, decided not to award a DHP because the property is unaffordable. It explained, in detail, how it reached that decision and it explained the decision is consistent with the DHP policy. Ms X says the Council used the wrong figures and sent different figures to me. But, the figures she sent to me are based on a different set of criteria and are not consistent with the information used by the Council. I have not seen any suggestion of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.
9. Ms X paid the bond before the Council had made its final decision so was not eligible for a DHP for rent in advance. But, the Council made a decision, which did not strictly follow the policy, to pay half the amount due to the financial pressures caused by paying the bond.
10. Ms X also complains about the way the Council dealt with her complaint. The Council has accepted that some of the complaint handling could have been better. But, this did not impact on the DHP decision and, in any case, one outcome of the complaint was that the Council offered £800. There is insufficient evidence of fault regarding the complaint handling to require an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman