Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s refusal to give him a business grant, causing him financial difficulties. The Ombudsman finds no fault in the Council’s decision making process.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s refusal to give him a business grant, causing his business financial difficulties. He says the Council ignored the evidence he provided.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke to Mr X and I reviewed documents provided by Mr X and the Council. I gave Mr X and the Council the chance to comment on a draft of this decision and I considered the comments provided.

Back to top

What I found

Grant Funding Schemes

6. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic the Government introduced two grant schemes to support businesses. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy published guidance for councils on how to apply these: “Grant Funding Schemes” (March 2020).
7. Funding is payable to the person recorded as the ratepayer in respect of the business on 11 March 2020. However, in cases where it was factually clear to the council on 11 March 2020 that the rating list was inaccurate on that date, it has discretion to award the grant based on their view of who would have been entitled to it.

Small Business Grant

8. Businesses which, on 11 March 2020, received Small Business Rates Relief (“SBRR”) may be eligible for a payment of £10,000.
9. Eligibility for SBRR is subject to s43 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988. This says the rate applies to occupied businesses.

Retail, Hospitality and Leisure Grant

10. Businesses which, on 11 March 2020, received the Expanded Retail Discount may be eligible for a grant between £10,000 and £25,000. Government guidance makes clear the Expanded Retail Discount applies to occupied businesses that are mainly used for retail, hospitality or leisure.

What happened

11. The Council says it visited the business premises on 17 February 2020 and found it empty, under refurbishment and not trading.
12. The Council says on 11 March 2020 the previous occupant was recorded as the ratepayer and the property was rated as empty. It was unaware Mr X had taken over the property until his landlord provided this update on 20 March 2020.
13. Mr X registered for business rates on 26 March. On 1 April he applied for a Small Business Grant and a Retail, Hospitality and Leisure Grant.
14. On 5 May the Council told Mr X it did not have him recorded as the Business ratepayer. To correct its records and to consider his eligibility for a grant it needed evidence of occupation. It asked for: 
• A copy of the signed lease for the premises
• Copies of bank statements for the business
• Any other bills (e.g. utility) addressed to the property, predating 11 March 2020
• Any other evidence showing occupation
• Confirmation this is his sole business premises.
15. On 6 May Mr X sent the Council a copy of his lease and a bank letter. In an email of 11 May he referred to attached utility bills.
16. On 11 May the Council acknowledged receipt of the documents but said it still needed more information. It asked Mr X to provide:
• Any utility bills addressed to the business and property predating 11 March
• Copies of invoices for stock and goods predating 11 March
• A copy of a bank statement predating 11 March
• Any other evidence showing occupation
17. On 19 May the Council wrote to Mr X. It said it had not received any further evidence from him and so could not update its records or process his claim. It explained his business was not eligible for a grant because it was empty on 11 March 2020.
18. Mr X replied to say he was struggling to understand why he was ineligible given the evidence provided.
19. On 21 May Mr X sent the Council further evidence. This included the lease agreement effective from 20 January, a utility bill for the period 20 Janaury to 24 April, invoices for stock dated from 20 January, a bank statement from 31 March and staff payslips dated 30 April for the month of April.
20. On 27 May Mr X made a complaint, querying why the Council had refused him a grant despite him providing evidence of his tenancy.
21. The Council responded on 17 June. It set out the condtions for awarding a grant. It explained Mr X’s evidence did not show the business was occupied and trading on 11 March 2020 as required. It noted he held a lease on the property. However, the wage slips were dated after 11 March 2020 and a utility bill for only £28.98 from January to April 2020 was not consistent with a business being open and trading. It told Mr X he could contact the Ombudsman.
22. Mr X contacted the Ombudsman. He complained the Council had ignored all his evidence and refused him a grant.
23. When I spoke to Mr X he explained he took over the business at the end of Janaury but after a few weeks closed for refurbishment. If the Council visited the business it would see he intended for it to reopen, given the work carried out. He explained he sent the Council the evidence it asked for, including wage slips. He did have more evidence, including wage slips dating from February 2020, however he had not sent these to the Council.
24. The Council confirms it has since amended its records to show Mr X as the ratepayer from 20 Janaury 2020. However, it continues to register the property as empty, on the evidence available.

Findings

25. I cannot question whether the Council’s decision is right or wrong simply because Mr X disagrees with it. I must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached.
26. Grants are only available to businesses which were occupied on 11 March 2020. The Council had rated the property as empty, upon finding it closed for refurbishment. Following Mr X’s contact, the Council asked for evidence of occupation on 11 March. The Council considered Mr X’s evidence but found this did not show the business was open and trading on 11 March. As a result, the Council decided Mr X was ineligible for a grant. The Council gave Mr X the opportunity to provide evidence, it took into account all the information available and, it made a decision in line with the law. I find no fault in the Council’s decision making process.
27. I can only consider how the Council made its decision at the time. If Mr X has further evidence to support his request for a grant, he may wish to provide this to the Council for its consideration. However, this does not affect my finding above.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I find no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making on Mr X’s eligibility for a grant. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman