Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax liability, universal credit and data protection. This is because we are not the appropriate body to consider complaints or disputes about these matters.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Ms Z) complains about the Council failing to apply transitional protection when she moved from claiming housing benefit to universal credit. Further, Ms Z also says the Council failed to acknowledge her student status which resulted in a wrong council tax bill.
2. In addition, Ms Z complains she was wrongly advised that she could apply for disablement relief and a discretionary (DHP) and/or exceptional hardship payments (EHP). She says this was requested to support her property move. Further, Ms Z says the information she provided to the Council over the telephone was no different to what she had provided in the initial written application. Ms Z therefore says she provided sensitive personal information when the matter was already determined and that this breached her data protection rights.
3. In summary, Ms Z says the alleged failings have meant significant time and trouble which in turn has impacted on her health. As a desired outcome, Ms Z wants the Council to compensate her for her time and health and remove information from its systems she feels was collected in breach of her rights.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome; or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

5. We cannot investigate a complaint where the body complained about is not responsible for the issue being raised. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(1), as amended).
6. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP). (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended).
7. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended).
8. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. Transitional protection is a temporary top-up payment available for some people moving from the older legacy benefits system to universal credit which is administered by the DWP. As universal credit is not an administrative function of the Council, we have no jurisdiction to investigate this part of Ms Z’s complaint. Further, the DWP is not a body within our jurisdiction and so we cannot investigate its actions. The restrictions I outline at Paragraphs 5 and 6 apply.
11. I recognise Ms Z feels she was wrongly advised to seek disablement support and financial support using a DHP and EHP. However, we are unlikely to find fault by the Council for encouraging Ms Z to seek these supports which would be dependant on the information she provided to determine her eligibility. While I note Ms Z believes her data protection rights were infringed by the Council, we normally expect someone to complain to the ICO in these circumstances. This is the body responsible for investigating concerns about data protection. I do not consider it unreasonable for Ms Z to refer her concerns to the ICO and so we will not investigate any issues relating to her data protections rights.
12. With respect to the Council’s decisions that Ms Z was not eligible to receive a discretionary DHP and/or EHP, these were made following consideration of her financial circumstances, specifically that she had savings in excess of £5,000. I am unlikely to find fault by the Council as it considered Ms Z’s circumstances and applied its policies. We cannot question the merits of a properly made decision.
13. I have considered Ms Z’s complaint that she received a council tax bill she was not liable for due to being a student. The Valuation Tribunal deals with complaints about liability for council tax and I consider it would be reasonable for Ms Z to refer the matter to this body. The restriction I outline at Paragraph 7 applies.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint because we are not the appropriate body to investigate complaints about council tax liability, universal credit and data protection. We are also unlikely to find fault by the Council with respect to its decisions that Ms Z was not entitled to receive discretionary financial support.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman