Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council stopping housing benefit. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s decision to stop her tenant’s, Mr Y’s housing benefit. She said that meant Mr Y could not pay his rent which caused her financial hardship, including arrears on her council tax.
2. Miss X also said the Council did not return her call about her council tax arrears. She wants financial compensation from the Council.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council said it decided to review Mr Y’s housing benefit after a telephone conversation with Miss X. It said in that conversation it identified a discrepancy between the housing benefit claimed and the rent paid. It said it stopped Mr Y’s housing benefit because the evidence provided by Miss X did not demonstrate she had received rent on a commercial basis from Mr Y. However, as part of its complaint consideration, the Council decided to use its discretion to accept the evidence provided as suitable. It said in making that decision it had taken account of the impact the non-payment was having on Miss X’s mental health.
7. Although Miss X is unhappy with the Council’s decision to stop the housing benefit, we will not investigate this complaint. The Council has set out its reasons for stopping the payment. There is not enough evidence of fault in how it made that decision to justify us investigating. Additionally, any significant injustice caused to Miss X was not the fault of the Council. It was Mr Y’s responsibility to ensure they paid any rent owed.
8. The Council said Miss X stopped paying her council tax before it stopped the housing benefit. The Council accepted it failed to return Miss X’s telephone call about her council tax arrears and apologised for this. In its complaint response, it said because of this she might have missed out on support. It said it had made service improvements to ensure a callback was not missed in future.
9. In response to my enquiries the Council said that given Miss X’s income it was unlikely she would have been eligible for council tax reduction. It also provided evidence it had previously spoken to Miss X about her arrears. It said it would contact her about her outstanding council tax debt.
10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint the Council did not return her call. Its apology and service improvements are a satisfactory remedy for any injustice caused. There is nothing to suggest Miss X would have been eligible for further support. Therefore, there is no outstanding significant injustice that requires investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman