Algorithmic Bias in Benefit Claims
Concerns regarding the potential for data analytics and machine learning algorithms used in benefit claims processing to result in unfair treatment.
Source spread
Where this theme appears
This theme appears across 8 independent accountability sources, so the source mix matters as much as the headline total.
2 inquiry recs
44 committee recs
6 NAO recs
1 IMB rec
5 PHSO decisions
726 LGO/SPSO decisions
2 CJINI reports
Browse by source
Source-grouped records are useful for tracing where a concern came from. Large sections show the 50 strongest matches for that source; counts still show the full theme total.
Inquiry recommendations(2)
Select committee recommendations(44)
#33 —
Recommendation: LLMs may amplify numerous existing societal problems and are particularly prone to discrimination and bias. The economic impetus to use them before adequate guardrails have been developed risks deepening inequality.
Response attribution not verified
#4 —
Recommendation: AI systems are prone to producing unfairly discriminatory outcomes, which may arise from bias in the datasets on which they are trained as well as from the way they are developed and deployed. This threatens the human rights of people …
#37 — Public Law Project warns of bias and transparency risks in DWP's machine learning for fraud.
Recommendation: However, written evidence we received from the Public Law Project raised a series of risks around DWP’s use of machine learning to tackle fraud. In particular, it noted the risk of machine learning taking on human biases when it was …
Response attribution not verified
#36 — DWP uses machine learning for fraud, but with limited transparency on fairness assessment.
Recommendation: DWP is implementing machine learning techniques to help it identify fraud in benefit expenditure. It has one machine learning model in operation, for new UC advance claims, alongside several others in development.69 The previous Public Accounts Committee raised concerns about …
Response attribution not verified
#7 — Share fairness impact assessment results for machine learning to reassure against unfair claimant treatment.
Recommendation: We remain concerned about the potential negative impact on protected groups and vulnerable customers of DWP’s use of machine learning to identify potential fraud. The previous Public Accounts Committee repeatedly raised concerns about the impact of data analytics and machine …
Response attribution not verified
#15 — Develop an ethical AI framework for employment support in collaboration with the sector.
Recommendation: DWP should work with the employment support sector to develop a framework for the ethical use of AI in employment support. (Recommendation, Paragraph 78) ‘Good jobs’ not ‘any jobs’
Response attribution not verified
#14 — Provide detailed plans for 'Jobcentre in your pocket' outlining public expectations and journal interaction.
Recommendation: In its response to this report, DWP should provide more details about its plans for a ‘Jobcentre in your pocket’. DWP should set out what the public can expect from a ‘Jobcentre in your pocket’, how it will interact with …
Response attribution not verified
#13 — DWP's 'Jobcentre in your pocket' digital tool lacks definition and fails to address AI risks.
Recommendation: DWP’s solution to a lack of work coach capacity is to use digital tools, with its flagship plan being a ‘Jobcentre in your pocket’. DWP plans to deliver this digital tool in 2027–28, but has yet to define what it …
Response attribution not verified
#13 —
Recommendation: We asked the Department how it ensured that vulnerable claimants were taken into account, in particular when it uses data analytics and machine learning. The Department told us that it was considering and testing for vulnerability “at every stage”.23 It …
Response attribution not verified
#5 —
Recommendation: The Department’s lack of transparency over its use of data analytics risks eroding public trust in the benefit system. The Department’s strategy to bring down fraud and error will depend increasingly on the use of data analytics and machine learning …
Response attribution not verified
#31 — Algorithmic bias in DWP systems acknowledged, but evidence of unfair impacts remains inconclusive.
Recommendation: We challenged DWP to explain how it would address the risk that legitimate benefit claims are unfairly delayed or reduced as a result of an algorithms targeting innocent behaviour, such as frequent changes of circumstances. DWP acknowledged that some level …
Response attribution not verified
#30 — Concerns persist regarding machine learning's potential unfairness and bias for vulnerable claimants.
Recommendation: We received written evidence from the Child Poverty Action Group and from the Public Law Project expressing concern about the potential unfairness of machine learning, particularly with regard to vulnerable claimants and people with protected characteristics.70 We asked DWP whether …
Response attribution not verified
#44 —
Recommendation: The Government should commission a review to understand the extent of predictive analytics in public-facing services, their likely trajectory over the next five years and the effects on digital exclusion policy. In the meantime the Government should require public service …
Response attribution not verified
#43 —
Recommendation: As public-facing services become increasingly digitised, machine learning tools and predictive analytics are likely to influence policy choices and service delivery. Digitally excluded groups are at risk of being poorly represented in key datasets, and hence face further marginalisation.
Response attribution not verified
#34 —
Recommendation: The AI Safety Institute should develop robust techniques to identify and mitigate societal risks. The Government’ s AI risk register should include a range of societal risks, developed in consultation with civil society. DSIT should also use its White Paper …
Response attribution not verified
#24 —
Recommendation: The Department explained that, in order to manage the risk of unintended bias in the use of data analytics to identify fraud, it ensured that there was always meaningful human involvement in decision-making, and that it undertook ‘fairness analysis’ to …
Response attribution not verified
#22 —
Recommendation: As part of our previous examination of the Department’s 2019–20 Accounts, we recommended that the Department should monitor and report any discrimination or bias caused by using artificial intelligence and machine learning on different claimant groups.41 In its response to …
Response attribution not verified
#1 — Automated payment system provides swift support but is limited in targeting specific group needs.
Recommendation: We welcome the automated nature of the payment system, which enabled the swift issue of cash support to many of those most in need. However, we recognise that it is limited in its ability to target payments and therefore meet …
Gov response: The Department is committed to providing direct and timely relief to those who need it most, which was especially important during the inflationary pressures leading to the rising cost of living. The automated, one-off payment …
Position Not Stated
#6 — Assess impact of data analytics and machine learning on legitimate claims and specific groups.
Recommendation: DWP has not yet done enough to understand the impact of machine learning on customers and provide them with confidence that it will not result in unfair treatment. DWP is expanding its use of advanced data analytics to tackle fraud. …
Response attribution not verified
#16 — DWP uses AI for written vulnerability screening, plans phone system for equivalent identification
Recommendation: DWP also told us that it had been using artificial intelligence to scan customers’ written communications for words and phrases that could indicate vulnerability so that it could provide support quickly. In subsequent correspondence, it highlighted that this technology solution …
Response attribution not verified
#54 —
Recommendation: The coronavirus pandemic has put the Universal Credit system under unprecedented strain. It has also highlighted the strengths of its digital, automated processes: a manual system could not have coped with millions of new claims in such a short time. …
Response attribution not verified
#53 —
Recommendation: We recommend that the Department assesses a model in which it estimates people’s daily pay rate from data it already receives from HMRC, as suggested by Ferret Information Systems, and in which it would make payments from day one of …
Response attribution not verified
#49 —
Recommendation: We recommend that the DWP improve the quality and detail of its published data on alternative payments, by publishing its figures on how many people revert to monthly payments from the twice monthly payment option in England and Wales. DWP …
Response attribution not verified
#48 —
Recommendation: While Scottish Government data shows a quarter of people revert from More Frequent Payments under Scottish Choices, DWP’s research does not provide a detailed understanding of how the Department monitors how more frequent payments work for people, and what it …
Response attribution not verified
#47 —
Recommendation: Universal Credit works best when it mirrors people’s daily lives. Payments which align with people’s rent schedules could make it easier for claimants to budget and plan. We recommend that the Department explain in response to our report whether it …
Response attribution not verified
#46 —
Recommendation: We recommend that the Department publishes the guidance given to Work Coaches when they advise people on APAs, to improve transparency in the process. The Department should make clear when and how a claimant is made aware of APAs both …
Response attribution not verified
#45 —
Recommendation: We recommend that the Department provide new and clearer guidance for Work Coaches to mitigate the impact of the wait and monthly payment system by making the option of more frequent payments under Alternative Payment Arrangements easy for all claimants …
Response attribution not verified
#23 —
Recommendation: We asked the Department about the degree of transparency that the public can expect to have about how its data analytics and machine learning tools will work. The Department told us that this was a “challenging balance”. It cautioned that …
Response attribution not verified
#43 — Mandate human review and verification of AI-assisted decisions affecting individuals
Recommendation: The potential for human error and bias notwithstanding, deployers should not solely rely on outputs produced with AI tools to determine their decision-making, particularly in areas that could affect the rights and standing of the individuals or entities concerned, such …
Response attribution not verified
#33 — Require AI model developers to summarise bias mitigation and report output bias levels.
Recommendation: Model developers and deployers should be required to summarise what steps they have taken to account for bias in datasets used to train models, and to statistically report on the levels of bias present in outputs produced using AI tools. …
Response attribution not verified
#32 — Require robust, independent testing and performance analysis for AI models prior to deployment.
Recommendation: AI can entrench and accelerate existing biases. The current Government, future administrations and sectoral regulators should require deployers of AI models and tools to submit them to robust, independent testing and performance analysis prior to deployment. (Paragraph 140) 56 Governance …
Gov response: 56 Governance of artificial intelligence (AI)
Not Addressed
#20 — Extend Algorithmic Transparency Standard to all public bodies from January 2025.
Recommendation: The requirement for Government departments to use the Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard should be extended to all public bodies sponsored by Government departments, from 1 January 2025. (Paragraph 77) The AI Safety Institute
Response attribution not verified
#38 — DWP commits to further assurance on fairness of machine learning techniques for benefits.
Recommendation: We stressed that we would like to be satisfied that DWP’s use of machine learning is fair and consistent. DWP highlighted its main safeguard, which is that it would never stop benefit payments to a customer due to an AI …
Response attribution not verified
#23 —
Recommendation: The Department told us that it is starting to build a system that is based on ‘transaction risking’; its vision is to be in a place where it can, in real time, or near real time, assess every claim as …
Response attribution not verified
#12 —
Recommendation: Universal Credit has the highest estimated overpayment rate of all measured benefits—9.4% (£1.7 billion) for 2019–20—and it has an estimated underpayment rate of 1.1% (£0.2 billion). This is the highest recorded overpayment rate for any benefit other than Tax Credits …
Response attribution not verified
#4 —
Recommendation: The systems that legacy benefits run on are not fit for purpose. It is disappointing that the Department has not adapted its IT systems to allow for flexibility in uprating these benefits to respond to national events. The Department has …
Response attribution not verified
#21 —
Recommendation: However, the PSFA also told us that there are instances where legislation, written some time ago, does not fully support the effective deployment of modern data analytics techniques. For example, the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 does not allow …
Response attribution not verified
#18 —
Recommendation: To ensure transparency, government bodies are required to disclose the use of algorithms, AI and machine learning through the Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard (ATRS) hub.52 As at February 2026 the hub, which requires records of any such items used in …
Response attribution not verified
#8 —
Recommendation: The risk assessments platforms will be required to carry out under the new online safety regulatory framework must not treat all users as being equally at risk from abusive content or behaviour. Instead, we recommend that platforms should be required …
Gov response: We agree that companies should be required to give separate consideration to the risks faced by different user groups. We have therefore amended the risk assessment provisions to require companies to consider the risk of …
Position Not Stated
#8 — Challenges in controlling Universal Credit fraud relating to household composition persist
Recommendation: We asked the Department about its controls to prevent fraud and error, particularly in relation to Universal Credit. It said that, because it was monitoring controls, it was able to identify where there were possible weaknesses and make continuous improvements. …
Response attribution not verified
#28 —
Recommendation: The Government says it will make it illegal for landlords to have blanket bans on letting to benefit recipients. If this is a commitment to preventing landlords from discriminating against benefit recipients, it is unrealistic. If it is a commitment …
Response attribution not verified
#15 — Include warnings on Lifetime ISA products about inferiority for potential Universal Credit claimants.
Recommendation: If the Government is unwilling to equalise the treatment of the Lifetime ISA with other Government-subsidised retirement savings products in Universal Credit assessments, Lifetime ISA products must include warnings that the Lifetime ISA is an inferior product for anyone who …
Response attribution not verified
#14 — Treat Lifetime ISA savings equally to other pension products within Universal Credit means testing.
Recommendation: If the Government wants to encourage long-term saving for retirement through Lifetime ISAs, it must treat the savings in a Lifetime ISA in the same way as other pension savings products as part of the Universal Credit means test. (Recommendation, …
Response attribution not verified
#13 — Inconsistency identified in Lifetime ISA treatment within Universal Credit eligibility assessments.
Recommendation: The Government’s argument that the LISA should be included within a Universal Credit eligibility assessment because the Government has contributed to the balance within the LISA is inconsistent. The Government provides higher levels of contribution through tax relief to many …
Response attribution not verified
NAO audit recommendations(6)
DWP Report on Account 2022/23
g as part of its response to PAC due in November 2023, DWP should seek to improve public confidence in its use of advanced data analytics by committing to regularly publishing summaries of: ? its assessment of bias in machine …
Accepted
Delivery of employment support schemes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic
While payments under the schemes have ended, the need to bear down on error and fraud has not. HMRC should: a) as part of strengthening its methodology for remaining compliance work, analyse its performance in tackling the main risks of …
Accepted
Department for Work and Pensions annual report and accounts 2018-19
• further analyse the causes of fraud and error due to misreporting of income and earnings in Universal Credit, including whether Real Time Information data are accurately identifying misreporting of employment and occupational pensions income;
Accepted
Department for Work and Pensions annual report and accounts 2018-19
• continue work to understand the reasons for the fraud and error rates for Universal Credit, including how the causes of fraud and error compare with those for other benefits and use this to determine its fraud and error strategy …
Accepted
Gambling regulation: problem gambling and protecting vulnerable people
The Commission and DCMS should: e) develop a deeper understanding of the causes and impacts of gambling?related harm. This should include the Commission’s own research programme as well its engagement with the wider research community. It could include, in particular, …
Accepted
Department for Work and Pensions annual report and accounts 2018-19
The Department should: • make better use of its data on income from other benefits to identify misreporting of benefit income and eradicate this cause of overpayments and underpayments;
Accepted
IMB individual recommendations(1)
Independent reviews(7)
Litchfield WCA Review Year 5 — Rec 16
The Department examines its work flow system, which appears to introduce an inevitable bias towards granting higher benefit levels, to ensure that the policy intent is being met.
Employment & Work
Litchfield WCA Review Year 5 — Rec 8
The Department investigates the substantial increase in the proportion of Support Group outcomes as a matter of urgency to determine whether the WCA is being applied correctly.
Employment & Work
Hall-Pesenti AI Review — Rec 14
The Information Commissioner's Office and the Alan Turing Institute should develop a framework for explaining processes, services and decisions delivered by AI, to improve transparency and accountability.
Other
Litchfield WCA Review Year 5 — Rec 30
DSD works with DWP to better understand the general issues relating to the high numbers of young people being assigned to the Support Group and that consideration is also given to issues which may be specific to Northern Ireland.
Employment & Work
Litchfield WCA Review Year 5 — Rec 10
The drivers for the high rate of young people (16-24) being assigned to the Support Group should be examined not only to ensure that benefit decisions are correct but also to help provide appropriate support.
Employment & Work
Litchfield WCA Review Year 4 — Rec 6
The Department reviews its use of WCA scores, places less emphasis on the final number attained and uses the calculation simply to determine whether the threshold for benefit has been reached.
Employment & Work
Harrington WCA Review (Year 1) — Rec 23
In year two the review should examine the Atos computer system (LiMA) and how it can drive the right behaviours.
Employment & Work
PHSO casework decisions(5)
P-004382 — Department for Work and Pensions
Mr and Mrs P complained DWP's incorrect Universal Credit calculations, due to Carer's Allowance issues, caused financial hardship and distress, arguing the awarded remedy was insufficient.
UK Government
Not Upheld
Nov 2025
P-001481 — The Adjudicator's Office
Ms K complained HMRC's inconsistent guidance and auto-populated tax returns led to her ineligibility for SEISS. She also alleged the Adjudicator's Office provided incomplete responses to her complaint.
UK Government
Jul 2022
P-002976 — Child Maintenance Service (CMS)
Mr R complained CMS ignored evidence of his low income, using outdated figures to calculate child maintenance, and didn't consider money his ex-wife owed him.
UK Government
Sep 2024
P-002491 — Child Maintenance Service (CMS)
Mr A complained the CMS delayed recalculating his maintenance payments after income changes and shared care arrangements, causing him financial difficulty.
UK Government
Mar 2024
P-002559 — Child Maintenance Service (CMS)
Miss A complained on behalf of Mr O that CMS failed to consider another child in maintenance calculations, used incorrect HMRC data, breached data protection, and incorrectly debited arrears. He sought apology and recalculation.
UK Government
Apr 2024
LGO / SPSO decisions(726)
22-002-948 — Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the complainant’s former employment with the Council. This is because the law prevents us from investigating employment related complaints. We will not investigate the complaint about council tax and council tax reduction because the Council has proposed a fair remedy.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2022
23-006-213 — Royal Borough of Greenwich
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her Housing Benefit, Council Tax, Council Tax Support, and a Severe Mental Impairment (SMI) exemption. We have concluded our investigation and find fault in how the Council handled a housing benefit appeal and how it failed to issue proper appeal rights …
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Upheld
Jul 2025
25-003-185 — Westminster City Council
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about court action taken by the Council for council tax arrears. This is because the complainant has started legal proceedings against the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Aug 2025
25-006-838 — London Borough of Islington
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the amount of a council tax credit is wrong. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Sep 2025
25-014-496 — Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Nov 2025
25-012-967 — Woking Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a summons for unpaid Council Tax on Mr X’s account. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jan 2026
25-012-315 — Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his council tax account. If he disputes his council tax liability, he has a right of appeal to a tribunal. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and any dispute about payments made by Mr …
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jan 2026
24-017-575 — Wokingham Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax banding and recovery action as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jan 2026
25-008-305 — Birmingham City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit appeal delay because the matter has been remedied.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Upheld
Jan 2026
25-019-030 — London Borough of Barnet
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the date the council tax banding was applied to his property. We have no power to investigate the actions of the Valuation Office Agency. Mr X can appeal to a Valuation Tribunal if he disagrees with the banding date.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jan 2026
21-016-099 — Coventry City Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled a reassessment of his council tax support claim. Mr X has a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if he disagrees with the decision. It is reasonable for him to go to the Information Commissioner if …
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Feb 2022
21-015-664 — London Borough of Hounslow
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council calculated the complainant’s housing benefit and raised an overpayment. This is because the complainant can use her review and appeal rights.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Mar 2022
21-016-480 — Central Bedfordshire Council
Mr X complains about the way the Council sent him council tax bills. We will not investigate this complaint because the matter has been remedied.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Upheld
Mar 2022
21-017-379 — East Lindsey District Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the so-called ‘bedroom tax’ because the complainant can use her review and appeal rights.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Mar 2022
21-010-040 — Sunderland City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this council tax complaint regarding the removal of a discount and subsequent refund. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault regarding the discount and because the Council has provided a fair remedy in relation to the refund. The complainant’s request for information is …
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Upheld
Mar 2022
21-007-369 — City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Summary: Mr B complained on behalf of Mr C that the Council had refused to forward his housing benefit appeal to the Tribunal service. We found the Council at fault, but we do not consider this caused Mr C an injustice.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Upheld
Apr 2022
22-001-808 — Birmingham City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about housing benefit overpayment which dates from 2009 to 2014. Mr X has or had the right to appeal to a tribunal against overpayment of housing benefit which it would have been reasonable to expect him to use. Additionally, we cannot investigate a …
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
May 2022
22-000-143 — London Borough of Brent
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint alleging a 2-year underpayment of Housing Benefit. This is because the complainant has a right of appeal to the specialist Housing Benefit tribunal. And it is reasonable to expect her to use this appeal right.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2022
21-012-667 — Cherwell District Council
Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s decision to take enforcement action for historic council tax arrears and the handling of her vulnerability as a debtor. We do not find fault in the Council’s decision to pursue the historic debts. However, we have found fault in the Council’s handling of …
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Upheld
Jun 2022
22-003-653 — London Borough of Barnet
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a landlord being made liable for a council tax bill when it should be the tenant who is liable. It would be reasonable for the complainant to appeal against the bill at the Valuation Tribunal.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2022
22-003-276 — London Borough of Harrow
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about matters related to Ms X’s council tax. It is unlikely we would criticise the Council’s decision not to allow Ms X to pay on a different day of the month, or the Council’s decision to take recovery action. Other parts of the …
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2022
22-003-174 — Eastbourne Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about lack of access to Ms X’s council tax account because it has been remedied.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Upheld
Jun 2022
22-002-833 — Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to determine a council tax request as the matter has been remedied and there is a right of appeal to a tribunal.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2022
24-003-690 — Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax liability because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2024
23-017-488 — Plymouth City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax liability. This is because there is not enough evidence of any fault and Mrs X can appeal to the valuation tribunal.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2024
23-016-432 — City of York Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on a Council Tax discount because it is reasonable for Ms X to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2024
23-014-351 — Thurrock Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council employing enforcement agents to collect unpaid council tax debts. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2024
24-002-413 — East Riding of Yorkshire Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council withdrew a council tax refund after it had issued the closing bill. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2024
23-016-456 — Westmorland and Furness Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council tax bill Mrs X says she is not liable for. This is because Mrs X has a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal, and it would be reasonable for her to use it.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2024
24-003-092 — London Borough of Haringey
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of Mr X’s council tax account. This is because he has right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal and it would be reasonable for him to use it.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jun 2024
24-002-500 — Fenland District Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to remove the complainant’s single person discount from his council tax. This is because the complainant can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jul 2024
24-002-400 — Dacorum Borough Council
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council billing the complainant for council tax, as well as taking court action for non-payment. This is because the issues raised have been considered during legal proceedings. Further, it would have been reasonable for the complainant to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal …
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jul 2024
23-018-129 — Salford City Council
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council failing to ask her for relevant information which she considers would have affected her welfare benefit claims. This is because the actions complained about are not the administrative function of a council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Other Categories
Jul 2024
25-001-218 — London Borough of Lambeth
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a delay in Business rates liability because it relates to a body out of jurisdiction and there is no evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
May 2025
24-023-044 — Vale Of White Horse District Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in Council tax billing. The Council has apologised and offered a payment plan. There is insufficient remaining injustice, and further investigation would not achieve a different outcome.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jul 2025
24-021-971 — City of York Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jul 2025
25-004-453 — City of Doncaster Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Discretionary Housing Payment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Aug 2025
25-004-433 — London Borough of Haringey
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Discretionary Housing Payment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Aug 2025
25-006-586 — London Borough of Waltham Forest
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council could not trace his Council Tax payment. This is because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s previous investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Oct 2025
24-011-936 — London Borough of Barnet
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a council tax error leading to bailiff action because the Council has agreed to provide a fair remedy.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Upheld
Nov 2024
24-015-472 — Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that his property is in the wrong council tax band. This is because we cannot investigate the banding decision made by the Valuation Office Agency. Also, the Council is not at fault for using the band provided by the Valuation Office Agency.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Dec 2024
25-012-431 — Royal Borough of Greenwich
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s recovery of a council tax debt. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Dec 2025
25-011-174 — Salford City Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to decline his application for council tax support, and its decision to recover overdue council tax via an Attachment of Earnings. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Dec 2025
25-013-349 — Manchester City Council
disabled band reduction for council tax. It is reasonable to expect Mrs X to use her right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. The Council has taken suitable action regarding its delay, and the remaining injustice is not significant enough to warrant investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Jan 2026
25-013-175 — Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council
on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Feb 2026
25-014-000 — North East Lincolnshire Council
on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Feb 2026
25-015-217 — Bristol City Council
on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Feb 2026
25-015-527 — London Borough of Richmond upon Thames
on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Feb 2026
25-021-559 — London Borough of Tower Hamlets
on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Upheld
Feb 2026
25-018-164 — East Devon District Council
on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.
LGO (Local Government & …
Benefits And Tax
Feb 2026
CJINI inspection reports(2)
Inspection of the Benefit Investigation Service of the Social Security Agency
Inspections and prosecutions by Departments and other bodie…
May 2006
Inspection of the Benefit Investigation Service of the Social Security Agency: A Follow-Up Review
Inspections and prosecutions by Departments and other bodie…
May 2008