Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a discretionary housing payment. There is no significant injustice or evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council gave the wrong amount for a discretionary housing payment (DHP) it awarded in a letter. He says it also paid the DHP a week later than stated. He complains the Council failed to apply reasonable adjustments he requested. He says this caused him anxiety. He seeks financial compensation.
2. Mr X also complains the Council made a weekly payment instead of a fortnightly payment in January 2026.

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, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council regarding the matters in paragraph 1.
7. The Council replied that
• it had incorrectly advised Mr X the DHP would be £136 per fortnight when it should have said it would be £272 per fortnight. It apologised for the confusion this may have caused.
• It had advised him he would receive a backdated payment of DHP on 19 December 2025 but it did not make the payment until 24 December 2025. This was due to an officer selecting a later payment cycle in error. It apologised for this and said it had discussed the error with the officer. It provided a statement to Mr X’s landlord regarding its delay in payment.
• It said it had contacted Mr X by telephone in December 2025. It later received an email requesting contact by email not by telephone as a reasonable adjustment in January 2026.
• It did not agree that financial compensation was appropriate.
8. We will not investigate this complaint because there is no significant injustice due to the Council’s errors. The Council’s apologies and other actions are a suitable remedy for the injustice it caused. There is not enough evidence of fault regarding the Council applying reasonable adjustments to justify investigation.
9. Mr X’s complaint about payments in January 2026 is a new complaint and the Council has not had an opportunity to respond. However, it would not be proportionate to expect the Council to respond. I do not consider the injustice is significant enough to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is either no significant injustice or there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman