Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered a welfare support request. The claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about how the Council handled her application to its local welfare assistance scheme. Mrs X says the Council gave her a short deadline to provide information to support her application but then delayed before refusing to give her the full support she applied for. Mrs X also complains about how the Council considered her appeal. Mrs X says the Council caused stress and uncertainty and wants the Council to make amends her for time and trouble.
2. Miss X also complains about the Council’s complaint handling.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X applied to the Council’s resident support scheme on Christmas day. On New Years Eve, the Council asked Mrs X to provide some information by New Year’s Day. Ms X provided the information and decided on Mrs X’s application 11 days later.
8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence Ms 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.
9. As Mrs X was able to provide the requested information, which was not a time-consuming ask, she did not suffer a significant personal injustice from the tight turnaround. I understand Mrs X found the short deadline stressful; however, I do not consider there has been significant enough personal injustice to warrant the Ombudsman devoting time and public money to investigation. The Council has apologised to Mrs X for the short deadline which is sufficient remedy.
10. The Council only partially accepted Mrs X’s application, so she appealed its decision. As part of its appeal considerations, the Council needed supporting evidence from Mrs X. Once it received that evidence, it decided the appeal. Mrs X was able to use the appeals process as we would expect. Any injustice from the Council’s actions is not significant enough to warrant investigation, as the appeals process gave Mrs X a fair opportunity to present her case.
11. The Council again partially accepted Mrs X’s application, following her appeal. I have seen no evidence of fault in how the Council came to its decision. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.
12. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we decide not to investigate the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman