Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment which arose in 2014. This is because it is a late complaint, the complainant could have used her appeal rights, and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, disputes a housing benefit overpayment. She says it is invalid because she was in care and she knew nothing about the overpayment until 2019. Ms X also says the Council told her she did not owe any money but then took money from her Universal Credit (UC).

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. This includes the complaint correspondence and a letter from 2014 confirming a repayment plan. I considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In 2014 the Council ended Ms X’s housing benefit from 2012 because it decided she had not been living at the property for which she claimed benefit. The Council asked Ms X to repay £9304 and notified her of her appeal rights. Ms X called the Council and made a payment arrangement in 2014 for £20 a month; she made one payment. I have seen a letter the Council sent to Ms X in 2014 confirming the arrangement.
8. Debt collectors tried to collect the overpayment in 2015. Ms X made a payment arrangement but did not maintain it. The Council sent letters about the overpayment in 2017, 2018 and 2019. It tried to collect the overpayment from Ms X’s UC but there were technical problems.
9. Ms X says she knew nothing about the overpayment until 2019. Ms X says she tried to challenge the overpayment in 2020.
10. In April 2021 the Council sent a letter which said £9294 would be recovered from Ms X’s UC and £0 was recoverable from her. The Council started to get money from Ms X’s UC in June 2022. Ms X says she thought her appeal in 2020 had been successful because the letter said nothing was recoverable from her.
11. Ms X says she should not have to pay any money because she had been in care and because the letter said no money is recoverable from her. She also says the Council knew where she was living from 2012 to 2014.
12. I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons. Part of the complaint is late. Ms X has known about the overpayment since 2014 but did not complain to us until 2022. I have seen evidence that Ms X made a payment plan in 2014 which demonstrates she was aware of the overpayment in 2014. I have not seen any good reason to accept a complaint which is eight years old.
13. If, for any reason, Ms X did not think she had been overpaid then she could have used her appeal rights in 2014 to challenge the overpayment. It is reasonable to expect her to have appealed because the tribunal is the appropriate body to consider disputes about overpayments. However, Ms X chose to repay the money rather than use her appeal rights. And if, as Ms X says, she was not given appeal rights, she could have complained in 2014 rather than making the payment plan.
14. Finally, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The letter from April 2021 says £9294 will be recovered from Ms X’s UC and that is what is happening. It is correct to say that nothing is recoverable from Ms X because it is being recovered from the UC. I appreciate Ms X misunderstood the letter but that does not mean the Council has done anything wrong or that Ms X does not have to repay the money.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate this complaint because it is a late complaint, Ms X could have used her appeal rights, and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman