Summary: Ms B complained the Council refused her application for a discretionary housing payment when it had previously made an award and there had been no change in her circumstances. Without the payment she was unable to remain living where she was. She had to borrow money to make the rent payments and had to find other accommodation. There was fault but it did not cause significant injustice. The Council has apologised and taken action to improve how it records its decision making.

The complaint

1. I call the complainant Ms B. She complained the Council refused her application for a discretionary housing payment when it had previously made an award and there had been no change in her circumstances. Without the payment she was unable to remain living where she was. She had to borrow money to make the rent payments and had to find other accommodation.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the complaint and documents provided by Ms B and spoke to her I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information. I sent a draft of this statement to Ms B and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of the relevant law, guidance and good practice

5. Discretionary Housing Payments (DHPs) provide financial support to help with rent or housing costs.
6. DHPs can help with housing costs for people affected by the benefit cap where there is a shortfall in rent. It is for the local council to decide whether to award DHP, how much the payment will be and for how long it will be paid.

What happened

7. Ms B moved into a property with her three children. She was receiving universal credit to help pay the rent. Before she moved in she checked what her entitlement would be.
8. When she received notification of her first payment of universal credit it was subject to the benefit cap so she did not receive as much as she was expecting. She applied to the Council for help to meet her rent payments through an award of DHP. The Council made an award for three months.
9. Ms B reapplied at the end of the three months. The Council refused her application. It said there had been a significant reduction in funding for DHPs and that Ms B needed to be seeking employment.
10. Ms B asked the Council to review its decision. The Council rejected Ms B’s appeal.

Analysis

11. There is a guidance manual on how DHP should be managed and awarded. It is not for us to substitute our judgment for that of the Council and come to our own view on whether someone should be awarded DHP. We expect to see that a council has properly considered an application and reached a sound decision based on the information before it.
12. When Ms B reapplied the Council said it had had to alter how it considered applications because of a reduction in funding. It has commented in response to the complaint that it has had to prioritise DHP awards to help to house homeless household or prevent imminent homelessness. It said it took into account Ms B’s circumstances and the ages of her children when deciding not to make an award. But it has provided no explanation of how it considered Ms B would be able to find work given her circumstances. Nor has it provided any evidence to show its consideration and reasoning. I am not, therefore persuaded, the Council did consider properly Ms B’s circumstance.
13. Where there has been fault we have to consider what difference it has made to the outcome. Although there was fault in the failure to be able to demonstrate proper consideration I cannot say that means the decision would have been different.

Back to top

Agreed action

14. The Council has already:
• apologised to Ms B for the failure to provide an adequate explanation of its decision making;
• taken steps to ensure it can show how it has considered applications for DHP.

Back to top

Final decision

15. There was fault but it did not cause significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman