Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council tax overpayment as the original decision could be appealed to a tribunal and is out of time. There is also insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the way the Council has pursued him for a housing benefit overpayment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
3. 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)
4. 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)
5. 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 how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. The Council decided in 2018 to recover an overpayment of housing benefit. Mr X did not appeal against this decision to a tribunal. The tribunal is an independent body which can determine any dispute about such decisions. I see no reason why an appeal could not have been made in this case and so the complaint is out of jurisdiction.
9. Mr X made an application for a Discretionary Hardship Payment (Discretionary Hardship Payment) from the Council in 2022 but this was refused. This decision is out of time for investigation and I see no grounds to disapply this rule.
10. In 2024 Mr X commenced work and the Council approached him for repayment of the final sum. Mr X agreed to repay £20 per month. However, these payments were not made and an attachment of earnings order was obtained from Mr X’s wage in July 2025.
11. The Council is entitled to seek an attachment of earnings order where a debt is owed to the Council. I am not satisfied that the Council’s actions in so doing are fault. Mr X says that the Council officer he spoke to in 2024 was rude. However, it would not be possible to prove such a claim after this time and the injustice caused, whilst it may have been upsetting for Mr X, would not be sufficient in itself to warrant investigation.
12. Mr X asked the Council write off the debt. The Council considered this but decided not to do so. Such an action is at the Council’s discretion and I see no evidence of fault in the way this was considered and so we cannot question the decision the Council reached.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he had a right of appeal to a tribunal, much of the complaint is out of time and there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman