Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council delayed in resolving her complaint about an invoice. This is because an investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council delayed in resolving her complaint about an invoice. She says this caused her distress and upset and wants to be compensated for this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 further investigation would not lead to different findings or outcomes. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. At the end of February 2024, Ms X was contacted by debt collectors regarding an unpaid invoice. Ms X said she never received the invoice in question and complained in June 2024.
6. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaint in July 2024. The Council explained the invoice had been generated due to an overpayment of just over £14,000 that had been paid into Ms X’s direct payment account in 2020.
7. The Council also explained how the figure in the invoice had been reached. The Council said that it had calculated £10,500 as the amount needed to cover six weeks of contingency funds that needed to be left in the direct payment account. The remaining amount raised in the invoice was the overpayment that needed to be repaid to the Council.
8. The Council recognised it had delayed in issuing the invoice as it did not issue the invoice until 2023, despite the overpayment occurring in 2020. The Council also recognised that it failed to send sufficient information to explain the reason for the invoice.
9. The Council agreed to waive the invoice so that the overpayment did not need to be repaid.
10. An investigation is not justified because it would not lead to any different findings or outcomes. This is because the Council has already accepted fault with failing to properly explain the reasons for the invoice until its complaint response. Further, the Council has apologised and agreed to waive the overpayment so that Ms X does not need to pay this back.
11. I note Ms X says she went through extreme distress worrying about the matter and that she was caused time and trouble in pursing her complaint. Ms X wishes to be compensated for this.
12. I do not consider an investigation would lead to any recommendations for any financial remedy. First, the Council took around a month to investigate and respond to Ms X’s complaint. This is not an unreasonable timeframe and I do not consider it is likely we would consider this fault.
13. Second, while I acknowledge Ms X will have been caused some distress in finding out about the debt, the Council has already provided an appropriate remedy for this by providing a sincere apology and by waiving the overpayment.
14. In agreeing to waive the overpayment, Ms X has financially benefited as she received over £3000 which she should not have. As the Council has remedied the injustice above and beyond what we would have recommended, it is not appropriate for us to provide another financial remedy on top of this.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because an investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman