Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for Discretionary Housing Payment. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council has made its decision, and so we cannot question the merits of the decision itself.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP).

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information he provided. I also gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on his complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council’s policy says the following about DHPs.

“DHPs are not payments of housing benefit. DHPs are awarded from a cash limited budget, at the discretion of the local Council, where it is considered additional help is needed… A DHP payment can only be made if you are already in receipt of housing benefit. Additionally, you need to demonstrate that due to your personal circumstances you need extra help with your housing costs.”

6. Mr X applied for a DHP and sent the Council financial information. The Council wrote to Mr X and said his weekly income was higher than his weekly expenditure. Mr X could therefore afford to pay his rent and the Council refused his application for DHP.
7. The Ombudsman is not a right of further appeal and we can only question a council’s decision if there is fault in the way the decision was reached. The Council has considered Mr X’s application for DHP and has decided he does not meet the criteria in its published policy. It has explained this decision to Mr X. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council has reached its decision to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council has made its decision, and so we cannot question the merits of the decision itself.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman