The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the amount of housing benefit and council tax support the Council awarded to the complainant in 2020. This is because the complainant could have appealed to the tribunal and because it is a late complaint.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council did not award the correct amount of housing benefit and council tax support in 2020. He says the Council treated him as receiving furlough payments he did not receive. Mr X wants compensation and for the Council to pay the correct amount of benefit.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended) The Social Entitlement Chamber (also known as the Social Security Appeal Tribunal) is a tribunal that considers housing benefit appeals. (The Social Entitlement Chamber of the First Tier Tribunal) The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and some of the benefit decision letters. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
The Council made benefit decisions in 2020. The decision letters notified Mr X of his right to appeal to the tribunal within one month of the date of the decision. Mr X provided the Council with more information but did not lodge an appeal with the tribunal.
Mr X says the Council’s decisions are wrong because it has treated him as receiving furlough payments he did not receive. Mr X says the Council has lied because it said it would change the decision if he provided bank statements showing he did not receive the money. Mr X says he provided such statements.
The Council accepts Mr X did not receive the money but is treating him as receiving notional income. This is because it has received evidence from HMRC that furlough money was received by the company. Information from Companies House suggests Mr X is the sole director and sole employee of the company.
I will not investigate this complaint because Mr X could have appealed to the tribunal. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal because the tribunal is the appropriate body to consider benefit disputes. This is a complex dispute involving a company, the HMRC and receipt by the firm of furlough payments. It would be for the tribunal to have decided whether the Council was correct to have treated Mr X as receiving notional income (the furlough payments). The tribunal is free to use, made up of benefit experts, and the Council notified Mr X of his appeal rights. We do not make benefit decisions – that is the role of the Council and the tribunal.
I also will not start an investigation because this a late complaint. Mr X complains of a benefit decision the Council made in May 2020 but he did not complain to us until August 2022. I have not seen any good reason to accept a late complaint, especially as this was a matter for the tribunal and Mr X could have used his appeal rights in 2020.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because Mr X could have appealed to the tribunal and because it is a late complaint.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman