Agenda item

The Committee received a report for noting which provided an update on Housing Benefit subsidy overpayments, following a report from BDO to the Committee in February 2019 which highlighted the Council had a higher than usual number and value of overpayments arising from local authority errors and administrative delays. The reasons for this were partly to do with the Council clearing a large backlog in this area in 2017/18. The Committee noted that following the BDO report in February, additional sample checks were carried out which, following dialogue with the DWP, resulted in a reduction in the subsidy loss for 2017/18 from £458k to £61k. The Council was also unable to claim a grant from the DWP for authorities who did not breach the 0.54% of their benefit threshold, which was estimated to be around £1.4m. The report was introduced by Andy Briggs, AD Customers, Transformation and  Resources as well as Helen Hili, Service Manager SSC – Central Service Delivery as set out in the agenda pack at pages 9-13. The following was noted in discussion of the report:

a.    The Committee noted that Haringey Council administered Housing Benefits and Council Tax Reduction for approximately 27,000 and 25,00 claimants respectively and those payments were made on behalf of the DWP who then transferred the money back to the Council via a subsidy claim. No subsidy was paid for overpayments that exceeded 0.54% of the total benefit.

b.    BDO advised that the Council had caught up with the backlog in 2018/19 and that current performance was on track to remain under the threshold by year end. BDO advised that this was the best position that the auditors had seen in the four years since being appointed. The Committee was advised that the challenge for the Council was to maintain this level of performance.

c.    The Committee sought reassurance around the use of risk-based verification software and concerns that some council’s had stopped using it due to safeguarding concerns. In response, officers advised that they weren’t aware of the specific issue but advised that they had spoken to other councils who had used the software for many years and that feedback was very positive. Officers advised that the software was working well and that it allowed them to remodel the risk profile to focus on the high risk cases.

d.    The Committee sought clarification on the process for claiming the subsidy from the DWP and whether the Council was always out of pocket. Officers advised that the subsidy claim was calculated through estimates and that a final tally up was done at the end to make sure that these were correct.

e.    The Committee sought further clarification around how this was reflected within the Council’s accounts and the MTFS. Officers advised that an estimate was made based on spending at the start of the year and that if that estimate was not met there would likely be a negative variance in the next year’s accounts. The MTFS was worked out on an assumption of a neutral position i.e. that the Council would get back what it put in. The Chair commented that there were also contingency resilience reserves built into the budget.

f.     In response to concerns about the level of Haringey’s overpayments and how this compared to the total amount of benefits it paid, officers agreed to check the level of benefit payments and how this compared across London. Officers also agreed to check how Haringey’s overpayments compared to its statistical neighbours. Officers commented that the data was complicated by people being afraid to inform the Council of a change of circumstance for fear of losing money (Action: Helen Hili).

g.    The Committee sought clarification on how  the impact on customers was measured. In response, officers advised there were a number of indicators which demonstrated overall satisfaction levels such as the number of complaints received, the number of Member Enquiries and the number of complaints that were escalated to stage 2.

h.    Officers advised that the number of queries in relation to housing benefit, including repeat queries, were coming down at the front end of the process i.e. telephone queries and in person at customer service centres. The reduction in these contacts had also been confirmed by the external auditor. Officers added that they would continue to monitor this going forwards and were mindful of the importance of the quality of user experience.

i.      The Chair welcomed officers’ invitation to come back with another report next year and also requested that it include some analysis on the Risk Based Verification model and the wider implementation of the FOBO programme. (Action: Andy Briggs/Helen Hili).

RESOLVED

       I.        The Committee noted the Housing Benefit Subsidy update.