Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a grant for businesses affected by COVID-19. This is because there is no evidence of fault affecting the decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a £10,000 Government grant businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. This complaint involves events that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Government introduced a range of new and frequently updated rules and guidance during this time. We can consider whether the council followed the relevant legislation, guidance and our published “Good Administrative Practice during the response to COVID-19”.
3. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s response. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and considered his comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. In March 2020, the Government created schemes for councils to pay grants to small businesses. This was because the COVID-19 restrictions affected so many of them.
6. A business’ right to a grant depends on its rateable value on the business rating list and its eligibility for certain business rate reliefs on 11 March 2020.
7. Mr X completed work on a holiday apartment in February 2020. The Council signed off the work in its capacity as Building Inspector on 13 March 2020 and the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) assessed the apartment as liable for council tax from May 2020. Mr X challenged the VOA’s decision as he believed the apartment should be entered into the rating list for business premises as he intended to use it as a holiday let. The VOA accepted Mr X’s challenge and confirmed he would be liable for business rates, rather than council tax, from June 2020.
8. Because the apartment was not on the rating list on 11 March 2020 Mr X was not automatically entitled to a grant. He applied to the Council but it refused his application as he did not meet the criteria.
9. Mr X asked the Council to review its decision but it confirmed it was correct. It agreed to consider any evidence he had to show he had taken action to have the property added to the rating list prior to 11 March 2020, but Mr X says it failed to consider the information he provided. He says the delay in adding the apartment to the rating list rests with the Council for not signing off the work quickly enough and with the VOA for incorrectly assessing the property for council tax.

Assessment

10. As set out at Paragraph 6 above, the relevant date in determining a business’ eligibility for a grant is 11 March 2020. Under guidance issued by the Government councils have a limited discretion to award grants to businesses where their premises were not on the rating list on this date; this is primarily to avoid manifest errors, for example where the council or VOA knew before 11 March 2020 that there was an error in the list which was awaiting rectification.
11. Mr X believes this is the case here but the VOA’s decision does not support his assertion. Mr X relied on the Council to report completion of the work to the VOA and has provided details about its delay in doing so. But the VOA is responsible for determining whether a property should be added to the rating list and it has decided not to backdate the entry to 11 March 2020 or before. In these circumstances, regardless of any delay Mr X remains ineligible as his property does not meet the criteria for a grant. We could not therefore say the Council was at fault for refusing Mr X’s application or for declining to alter its decision.
12. Mr X also complains he was wrongly charged council tax for the period between completion of work on the apartment and the property’s entry onto the rating list. But this charge results from the VOA’s decision rather than any fault by the Council. In the event Mr X is successful in challenging the VOA’s decision and removing any liability for council tax the Council has confirmed it would refund his payment.
13. Mr X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault affecting the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman