Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Discretionary Housing Payment or a complaint the Council did not provide homelessness support. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because part of the complaint has not completed the Council’s complaints process.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, disagrees with the Council’s decision not to award a Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP). She also says the Council has not provided appropriate housing and homelessness support. Ms X wants the Council to properly assess her DHP application.

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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We only consider complaints about issues the Council has had a chance to fully consider. We normally expect people to complete a council’s complains process.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes information about Ms X’s DHP and housing applications. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X asked for housing support in July 2023 and said was about to be evicted. The Council gave her forms to complete and information about Local Housing Allowance rates (the maximum someone can receive in benefit to with rent). The Council closed the application in October because it had not had any further contact from Ms X.
6. In the meantime, Ms X found her own accommodation. Ms X was a part-time student and worked part-time; Ms X also had mental health issues. The rent was £1250 a month. Ms X says the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) told her she would get monthly help with the rent of £1150. Ms X signed the tenancy. Ms X says her options were limited because she was homeless and a student.
7. Ms X then found out the help she could get with the rent was capped at £490 a month. Ms X applied for a DHP; she asked for £760 a month for two years to cover the difference between the DWP help and the rent.
8. The Council considered the application but refused it; it noted that Ms X could have found out, in advance, that the help she could receive would be limited. It asked for proof the DWP had told her she would get £1150 a month but Ms X said it was verbal advice. The Council assessed Ms X’s expenditure and decided that some it was high. The Council explained it has limited funds to pay DHPs and they are intended to cover short term essential living costs. The Council suggested Ms X could make a complaint to the DWP if she thought it had given her inaccurate information about how much help she would get.
9. Ms X left the flat. She says she struggled to find somewhere else to live and the Council did not help her.
10. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. DHPs provide short-term emergency support, usually for a maximum period of 13 weeks. There is no right to a DHP and they are not intended to provide long-term support. Councils have a limited budget for DHPs and must focus resources on those in most need and try to help as many people as possible. The Council considered the reasons why Ms X needed help and her available resources but noted there was information available, before she signed the tenancy, to allow her to realise the tenancy was not affordable, especially for a student.
11. We are not an appeal body and it is not my role to decide if Ms X is eligible for a DHP or to re-make the decision. I can only consider if there was fault in the way the Council made the decision and I see no suggestion of fault. The Council considered Ms X’s application in the context of the DHP rules and, having considered all the factors, decided not to make an award. I appreciate Ms X disagrees with the outcome but, as there is nothing to suggest fault, there is no reason to start an investigation.
12. Ms X also complains the Council did not help her with her housing situation and homelessness. However, she has not completed the Council’s complaints process in relation to these issues so I cannot consider them. Ms X could complain to the Council if she wants to pursue this aspect of her complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because part of the complaint has not completed the Council’s complaints process.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman