Shropshire Star

Watchdog won't investigate Telford family's complaint of “distress” caused by bailiffs

Bailiffs caused “distress” to a Telford family as they pursued a seven-year-old benefit debt, but the local government watchdog says it won’t investigate their complaint because it is late.

Published
Last updated

“Mr C” and his family moved out of their house owing Telford & Wrekin Council for a housing benefit overpayment.

The authority says it wrote to him, but he denies receiving its letters then complained to the council after “enforcement agents” took over the case.

In an anonymised report, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman says it will not investigate because the complaint came more than a year after the alleged wrongdoing.

It adds that an earlier complaint to the council itself shows Mr C was aware of the debt two years ago, so he had “no good reason” for not complaining sooner.

Summarising the case, an LGO investigator writes: “In 2014, Mr C and his family moved out of a property they were living in.

“The council says it wrote to Mr C in 2015 to inform him of a debt that he owed for a housing benefit overpayment the previous year.”

The report notes that Mr C says he did not receive those letters.

“In 2019, after no payment had been received, the council passed the debt on to enforcement agents,” the report says.

“Mr C contacted the council to appeal the debt, but the council wrote to him in September 2019 to inform him that his appeal was out of time.

“The council received no further correspondence from Mr C until March 2021 when he again complained about further contact that he had received from the enforcement agents.”

He “complained about the council’s handling of matters” and said passing the debt on to bailiffs “caused him and his family distress”.

The report says the LGO does not usually accept complaints more than 12 months after a council’s alleged error. While Mr C may not have received the 2015 letters, it says, he contacted the council after hearing from the bailiffs so “was aware of the debt in 2019”.

“I see no reason why he could not have complained sooner,” it adds.

Sorry, we are not accepting comments on this article.