Archive has 265 results
-
London Borough of Islington (21 004 397)
Statement Not upheld Covid-19 27-Jan-2022
Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly refused his application for the Additional Restrictions Grant causing him financial hardship. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council considered Mr X’s application.
-
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (21 007 602)
Statement Not upheld Covid-19 27-Jan-2022
Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly refused two COVID-19 Test and Trace payments. Since the complaint to us, the Council has reviewed the applications and made the payments. We have therefore ended this investigation on the basis there is now no worthwhile outcome we can achieve.
-
Darlington Borough Council (21 014 113)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Covid-19 27-Jan-2022
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to award him a COVID-19 hardship payment for the 2021/22 financial year because there is no evidence of fault in its decision. We will not investigate the Council’s publication of misleading information on its website as the issue did not cause Mr X significant injustice.
-
Gedling Borough Council (21 001 463)
Statement Upheld Covid-19 26-Jan-2022
Summary: There was no fault in how the Council considered the complainant’s application for an additional restrictions grant, as it was entitled to decide the evidence did not support his eligibility. There was also no fault in how the Council decided his other grant applications. The Council was at fault for wrongly telling the complainant his application had been successful, but its quick rectification and apology for this error was an adequate remedy. We have therefore completed our investigation.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Covid-19 26-Jan-2022
Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint, about the Council’s refusal to grant rates relief to the complainant’s business under the expanded retail discount. This is because the complaint is late.
-
London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (21 013 103)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Covid-19 26-Jan-2022
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for business rates relief as there is no evidence of fault in the decision. We will not investigate his complaint about the Council’s demand for payment of his business rates arrears as it has entered into discussions to agree a payment plan and there is nothing more we could achieve.
-
Scarborough Borough Council (21 013 790)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Covid-19 25-Jan-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X not receiving a COVID-19-related business grant. The evidence suggests the Council was not at fault for refusing the grant.
-
Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (21 003 574)
Statement Not upheld Covid-19 25-Jan-2022
Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly refused his business a grant, causing financial difficulties. We find no fault in the Council’s decision making.
-
Cheshire East Council (21 004 809)
Statement Not upheld Covid-19 25-Jan-2022
Summary: Although the complainant missed out on a COVID-19 business support grant it appears he was eligible for, this was not due to fault by the Council. We have therefore completed our investigation.
-
Lancaster City Council (21 002 312)
Statement Not upheld Covid-19 25-Jan-2022
Summary: Ms X complained the Council wrongly refused her business a COVID-19 business grant, causing financial difficulties. There is no fault in how the Council determined Ms X’s application.