Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse Miss X’s application for Discretionary Housing Payment. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council rejecting her application for Discretionary Housing payment. She says it included her PIP disability benefit in the decision which is exempt from housing benefit income calculation. She says her rent has increased and she needs an additional payment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X applied for discretionary housing payment because she says her rent has increased by over £8.00 per week and she has a shortfall in her income to afford it. She has previously received the payments over ten years ago but her last two claims have been declined.
6. The Council told her that she did not qualify because her income is sufficient to meet the shortfall and she has significant savings. The payment is discretionary and is from a fixed budget. The Council says it issues payments to those most unable to meet their housing costs even with housing benefit.
7. Miss X receives PIP disability payments and the government guidance says authorities may take this into account as income but they must consider how much of it is being used to cover genuine disability expense. Miss X included in her expenses costs which are not disability related and which could be met from her other income and savings. It did discount the disability related costs which she listed in her expenditure.
8. Miss X challenged the decision and the Council reconsidered its assessment of her claim. The claim was unchanged as she was considered to have sufficient income and savings to afford the additional housing costs.
9. When considering complaints, we may not question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Councils’ officers or members when there is no fault. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse Miss X’s application for Discretionary Housing Payment. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman