Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Miss X’s application for a discretionary housing payment as there is insufficient evidence of Council fault causing a significant injustice to Miss X.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about delay by the Council in dealing with her application for a discretionary housing payment and its refusal of the application. Miss X says this has caused her anxiety and depression and has impacted her financially. Miss X wants her application to be reviewed and for the Council to provide responses in a timely manner.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 or continue an investigation if we decide any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Discretionary Housing Payments (DHPs) are additional financial support provided by local authorities to help with housing costs for claimants in receipt of housing benefit or universal credit. They are not benefits and are paid from set budgets at the discretion of local authorities to those most in need. The Government’s guidance manual for DHP says that in determining applications, local authorities can ask for any information they need to make a decision.
6. The Council has refused Miss X’s application because it says she has failed to provide evidence that she has paid rent to her landlord during the time the application was ongoing. The Council considers it is unable to guarantee any DHP payment will be made to the landlord, to reduce Miss X’s rent arrears, as she has requested the payment is made directly to her.
7. It is for the Council to decide what information it needs to assess an application, and to decide that application, using its own discretion. While I recognise Miss X is unhappy with this decision, I cannot see grounds that would enable us to criticise it.
8. While the Council acknowledged in its responses to Miss X that it was working through a backlog of cases which meant some delay, I do not consider this has caused Miss X a level of injustice significant enough to warrant our further involvement. The issue at the crux of this complaint is that the Council says Miss X has not provided the information it has requested, and any Council delay has fundamentally no bearing on this.
9. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing a significant injustice to her. Our further investigation is therefore not warranted.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman