The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal of Miss X’s application for discretionary housing payment. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Miss X complained about the Council’s decision not to approve her application for discretionary housing payment. She says she is receiving less in the housing element of her universal credit claim than the rental charged and so should be eligible for the payment.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended) 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss X is claiming universal credit and noticed that in 2022 her rent was falling into arrears. She receives the housing element payment in her universal credit benefit but there is a shortfall between the payment and the rental changed, which has led to the arrears. She applied to the Council for discretionary housing payment which is designed to make up shortfalls between a claimant’s rent payment and the housing element.
The Council refused her application. It informed her that the housing element did not cover her rent because the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) was paying her on the previous rental figure and not the current higher one. There was no shortfall in the DWP payments, it is simply that the payment calculation is based on incorrect information.
The Council advised Miss X to update the DWP on her rental charge so that it could recalculate the housing element. Miss X was dissatisfied with the outcome of her discretionary housing payment claim and asked for a review. The Council reviewed her case but the outcome was the same because the problem is due to DWP information and not a shortfall in her universal credit.
When considering complaints, we may not question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Councils’ officers or members. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal of Miss X’s application for discretionary housing payment. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman