Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment created in 2016. This is because part of the complaint is late and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. In addition, the complainant could have used her appeal rights.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, says she should not have to repay a housing benefit overpayment because it was caused by Council error and because she split from her partner after the overpayment arose. Ms X says recovery should stop as she is no longer part of a couple.

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))
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. The Social Entitlement Chamber (also known as the Social Security Appeal Tribunal) is a tribunal that considers housing benefit appeals. (The Social Entitlement Chamber of the First Tier Tribunal)
5. 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

6. 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

7. The law says a housing benefit overpayment is recoverable from the person the money was paid to unless it was caused by an official error.
8. In 2016 the Council asked Ms X to repay a housing benefit overpayment of £17,413. This was an amalgamation of several overpayments that had arisen since 2011. Each overpayment decision carried appeal rights although Ms X says she knew nothing about the overpayments until 2016. Ms X had a partner but the claim was in her name and the money was paid to her.
9. Ms X asked for a review in July 2016 and provided new information. The Council revised the decision and reduced the overpayment to £3415. Ms X had moved and the Council did not send the revised decision to the new address. However, Ms X received the decision and asked for a breakdown of the revised amount and she made a payment plan. The letter told Ms X she could make a late appeal to the tribunal.
10. Ms X paid £40 a month from 2016 until April 2021 to repay the overpayment. By April she owed £1360. Ms X stopped making payments and in June reported that her partner had left. Ms X said she was not liable to repay the overpayment as it was caused by Council error. She also said she should not have to make any more payments because she was no longer part of a couple.
11. The Council explained she was liable to repay the overpayment because the claim was in her name and the overpayment arose because she had delayed reporting changes in her income. It said that her partner leaving had no bearing on the recoverability of the overpayment. The Council suspended recovery action for three months and reduced the payment plan to £20 a month.
12. I will not start an investigation because part of the complaint is late. Ms X has known about the overpayment since 2016 but did not complain to us until 2022. This is significantly longer than 12 months and I have not seen any good reason to accept such a late complaint. Ms X could have made a complaint in 2016 if she disagreed with the revised amount or she could have used her appeal rights. It is reasonable to expect Ms X to have appealed because the tribunal is the appropriate body to consider benefit disputes. Ms X could have made a late appeal to the tribunal and submitted, as part of her appeal, that she had not previously been notified of any of the overpayment decisions.
13. I also will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. This is because it correctly told Ms X that the overpayment is recoverable from her because she was the claimant and her partner leaving has no bearing on this. The Council also suspended recovery for three months and then reduced the repayment amount.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not start an investigation because part of the complaint is late and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. In addition, Ms X could have used her appeal rights.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman