Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about local housing allowance and discretionary housing payments. Local housing allowance is not an administrative function of the council, and the remaining injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complains on behalf of Mr X. Mrs Y complains the local housing allowance Mr X receives is not enough to cover his rent. Mrs Y also complains the Council has only offered temporary support. Mrs Y says this causes distress and instability. She wants the Council to reassess Mr X’s local housing allowance and provide ongoing support to cover the shortfall.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate complaints about actions which are not the administrative function of a council. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(1) as amended).
4. 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 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council has no authority to set or change Mr X’s local housing allowance. The law prevents us from investigating this matter as it does not concern an administrative function of the Council.
8. Mrs Y applied for a discretionary housing payment (DHP), which was the welfare support scheme. The Council awarded the DHP to cover three months but, Mrs Y says, refused to commit to ongoing payments to cover future shortfalls. This means Mrs Y would have to apply again in future for further support.
9. We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence Mr X has suffered a significant injustice. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures.
10. I recognise the Council’s decision places an administrative burden on Mrs Y to make repeated applications and does not provide the financial stability she seeks. However, the shortfall is not the result of any fault of the Council, and the Council does not have a duty to make up for it in anticipation of future need.
11. In addition, if the Council refuses a future welfare support application, Mr X and Mrs Y could bring another complaint to the Ombudsman, once they have gone through the Council’s appeals and complaints process. So, I do not consider there has been significant enough personal injustice to warrant the Ombudsman devoting time and public money to investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint because local housing allowance is not an administrative function of the council, and any remaining injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman