Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s application for a discretionary housing payment. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council:
• wrongly ended its homelessness prevention duty;
• tampered with her application for a discretionary housing payment (“DHP”);
• bullied her and;
• handled her complaints poorly.
2. She says she has suffered significant distress as a result.

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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(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 ended its homelessness prevention duty however it reinstated this following a review. Ms X remained in her property in the meantime. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
7. The Council explained why it amended the figures on Ms X’s DHP application and accepted it should have gained a new signature from her. It also explained why these matters did not affect its decision to refuse her application. The police are better placed to consider allegations of fraud. And any fault by the Council did not cause Ms X significant enough injustice for us to investigate.
8. It is not a good use of our resources to investigate the Council’s complaint handling when we are not investigating the substantive matters.
9. Ms X’s complaints of poor communication by the Council, which she describes as bullying, did not cause significant enough injustice for us to investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman