Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed in passing his tenants’ housing benefit appeals to the independent Tribunal. The Council was at fault for delay in sending the appeals to the Tribunal. This meant the tenants experienced a period of uncertainty. The Council has now made new decisions for which the tenants have a right of appeal. The Council has agreed to remind its staff they must forward appeals to the Tribunal promptly.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council delayed in passing his tenants’ housing benefit appeals to the independent Tribunal. Mr X’s tenants are vulnerable, and he says the delay caused them significant distress and affected their wellbeing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5)). I have exercised discretion to investigate this complaint because the Council has had sufficient opportunity to respond to Mr X’s concerns as a complaint.
4. 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). 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 may investigate matters coming to our attention during an investigation, if we consider that a member of the public who has not complained may have suffered an injustice as a result. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26D and 34E, as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have considered:
• all the information Mr X provided and discussed the complaint with him;
• the Council's comments on the complaint;
• the relevant law and guidance and the Ombudsman's guidance on remedies.
8. Mr X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

9. Housing benefit helps people on low incomes to pay their rent. It is a means tested benefit, taking both capital and income into account.
10. The council must make a decision about housing benefit in writing. The decision notice must also advise claimants of their rights to ask for more information and to appeal. Claimants can ask the council to ‘reconsider’ the decision. Before doing so they can request a written statement of reasons for the decision. The claimant must ask for a reconsideration and/or appeal within one month of the decision or within two weeks of receiving additional information they requested from the council. If the council receives an appeal request, it must pass the appeal to the Tribunal “as soon as reasonably practicable”. (Rule 24(1A) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008)
11. The Ombudsman’s principles of good administrative practice encourage councils to make timely decisions and proactively explain the reasons for any delays. As a benchmark we consider councils should aim to forward appeals within four weeks.

What happened

12. Mr X represents a supported accommodation provider. In 2021, tenants began occupying the property and applying for housing benefit. In total, eleven tenants moved in. The Council decided to refuse ten of the tenants housing benefit; it has not made a decision on the last tenant yet. The Council refused five of the tenants in early November 2021 and five in February 2022.
13. Within four days of the first November decision letter, Mr X asked the Council for its reasons for refusing to award housing benefit. The Council responded briefly in mid-November to explain its rationale.
14. In late November, the tenants who received a decision letter in November 2021 appealed.
15. The Council sent Mr X further information on its reasons for deciding not to award housing benefit in mid-January 2022. The tenants updated their grounds for appeal the same day.
16. In February 2022, the Council began seeking information about the property to prepare its case for the Tribunal.
17. In March 2022, the tenants who received decisions in February 2022 appealed the Council’s decision.
18. The Council did not send any of the appeals to Tribunal. In August 2022, it told the Ombudsman it had received the outcome of the information it sought in February and had decided to award the residents housing benefit.

Findings

19. The Ombudsman cannot investigate a complaint about any matter which was appealed, or could have been appealed, to a Tribunal. The Ombudsman can, however, investigate the appeal process itself.
20. Mr X does not have consent to act on behalf of the tenants. However, the Ombudsman is able to investigate if we consider a member of the public who has not complained may have suffered an injustice. I have therefore considered Mr X’s concerns about the impact of the Council's actions on his tenants.

Statement of reasons

21. Mr X requested more information on the Council's decision to refuse the housing benefit in early November 2021. The Council responded in brief in mid-November and more fully in January 2022. I am satisfied the Council sent its statement of reasons without undue delay

Delay in sending the appeals

22. The Council delayed in sending the appeal to Tribunal because it wanted time to prepare its case by seeking more information. It is not acceptable to delay passing an appeal for that reason. The Council should pass on appeals “as soon as reasonably practicable”. The Ombudsman’s view is that this should usually be no longer than four weeks. The Council should have sent the appeals promptly on receiving them and finalised its arguments and evidence later if necessary. This was fault. While ultimately the Council reversed its decision and awarded the tenants housing benefit, the delay caused a period of uncertainty for the tenants. I am also concerned the fault may occur again, affecting other people in the Council's area. I have therefore made a recommendation to prevent that happening.

Back to top

Agreed action

23. Within three months of the date of my final decision, the Council will remind its staff they must pass appeals to the Tribunal without undue delay; usually within four weeks. They should do this regardless of whether the Council's case is prepared.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault causing personal injustice. I have recommended action to prevent reoccurrence of this fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman