Mansfield District Council (21 014 514)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax support 03-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the complainant’s council tax reduction. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the complainant could have used his appeal rights.

Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (21 016 675)

Statement Upheld Housing benefit and council tax benefit 03-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about benefit overpayments. The Council has now offered a reasonable remedy and Ms X had a right of appeal to a tribunal.

Harlow District Council (21 008 940)

Statement Upheld Covid-19 02-Mar-2022

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council refused her businesses grants, did not address her complaint properly and reported inaccurately on finances. We did not investigate the Council’s reporting as there is a more appropriate body. We found fault in the Council’s communications with Mrs X that did not affect its decision making. We recommended the Council provide Mrs X with an apology and address her outstanding complaints, pay £150 for time and trouble and take action to prevent recurrence.

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (21 010 238)

Statement Not upheld Covid-19 02-Mar-2022

Summary: We have discontinued our investigation about the Council’s decision to refuse the complainant’s business rates relief under the expanded retail discount scheme, and a grant under the retail, hospitality and leisure scheme, because his complaint is late. There was no fault in the Council’s decision the business is not eligible for partial rates relief.

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (21 004 717)

Statement Upheld Covid-19 02-Mar-2022

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council wrongly refused COVID-19 business grants, causing financial hardship. There was fault in the way the Council considered whether the business was a restaurant or takeaway. It also failed to consider whether the fact the business operated from a food court meant it was eligible for a Restart grant even if the business was deemed to be a takeaway. It should apologise, pay Mrs X £300 for the uncertainty and additional time and trouble she was put to, and reconsider her Restart grant application.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council (21 015 794)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Covid-19 02-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a small business grant. This is because the complaint is late and there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

East Cambridgeshire District Council (21 015 843)

Statement Upheld Council tax 02-Mar-2022

Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council dealt with her council tax payments. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the matter has been remedied.

Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (21 016 041)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 02-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to recover council tax support overpayments. That is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

London Borough of Lambeth (21 015 977)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Covid-19 01-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to grant him a business rates discount. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council (21 016 083)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 01-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about issues arising from a council tax payment. Fault by the Council has not caused the complainant injustice that would justify our involvement.