Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to decline Mr X’s discretionary housing payment application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council refused his discretionary housing payment application. He said he submitted all the evidence requested but the Council said he did not respond. He said the Council’s decision caused him significant distress and hardship. He wants the Council to consider the evidence he submitted and reassess his application.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

(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. Mr X complained the Council said he did not respond to its request for evidence in its decision to decline his application. The Council provided a further response which explained its reasons for declining the application. Therefore, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
6. In its final decision letter, the Council said it reviewed the application and it remained that it declined Mr X’s application. It explained Mr X’s capital had been analysed and he would need to reduce non-essential expenses. It clearly set out its reasons to decline the application.
7. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
8. Mr X may disagree with the outcome, but there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant out involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman