Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Local Welfare Assistance scheme because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about the Council’s decision not to provide help from the Local Welfare Assistance scheme (LWA). She says the Council treated her badly, did not return calls and threatened her with council tax.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council’s website explains that people cannot get help from the LWA if they have been housed in the borough by another council.
5. Ms X was housed in Waltham Forest in April by another council. The information from the other council said she must register for council tax in Waltham Forest. Ms X applied for help in April from the LWA. She referred to finding out about the scheme on the Council’s website. Ms X had not registered for council tax.
6. Ms X did not provide the supporting information requested on the application form. She says she did not have the information as she had recently moved. She made many calls to the Council but the only information she provided was in late May; this was an email stating she had placed in the borough by another council. Ms X says she was waiting for call backs from the Council to find out what information she needed to send; she says the Council did not call back.
7. In early June the Council refused her application for help because she was placed in the borough by another council. The Council also said she needed to register for council tax and said she could apply for council tax support (CTS). Ms X applied for CTS but her income was too high to qualify.
8. Ms X complained. She complained of delay and of being told her application had been accepted during a call with an officer. She also disagreed with the decision and complained about a lack of contact.
9. In response the Council confirmed that the decision she is ineligible for help is correct. It accepted it took too long to process the application, and apologised, but also said Ms X never provided all the supporting information. It said the website explained that people housed by another borough could not be helped by the LWA. It said the officer denied saying the application had been granted and there was no call recording to corroborate her allegation.
10. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council’s decision to refuse Ms X’s application is consistent with policy because she was placed in the borough by another council. We are not an appeal body and we could not ask the Council to provide assistance when that would be contrary to the policy. And, while there is no independent evidence that an officer said the application had been approved, even if he did say that the final decision to reject the application is correct.
11. The Council did not threaten Ms X with council tax but asked her to register because she is required to pay council tax. This echoes the advice provided by the council who placed her in the borough. The Council also invited her to apply for CTS and for discretionary support.
12. The Council did call Ms X back. It may not have responded to every request but this is not a degree of fault requiring an investigation.
13. I also will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. The Council accepts it took too long to process the application but it has apologised and, as Ms X is not eligible for support, the delay has not caused an injustice requiring an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice flowing from any fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman