Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (20 005 306)

Category : Benefits and tax > COVID-19

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 18 Mar 2021

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for a Government grant for businesses affected by COVID-19. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains about the Council’s decision to refuse her company’s application for a Retail, Hospitality and Leisure (RHL) grant to support businesses affected by COVID-19.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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”.
  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’. 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)
  3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I read through Mrs X’s review/appeal requests and complaints and the Council’s responses. I shared my draft decision with Mrs X and considered her comments.

Back to top

What I found

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. Mrs X’s business operates from a property classed as “warehouse & premises”. It supplies goods and services to the exhibition and events industry and Mrs X says it has suffered a loss of income as a result of COVID-19. She applied for a £25,000 RHL grant from the Council in 2020 but the Council refused her application. This was because eligible businesses had to meet the criteria for Expanded Retail Discount (ERD) and the Council felt Mrs X’s business did not. Its decision was based on Government guidance which states premises “that are not reasonably accessible to visiting members of the public” are not eligible for the relief.
  4. Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decision. She says the Government made clear the RHL grant scheme was to help businesses in the retail, hospitality and leisure industry and her business supplies companies in this sector.
  5. While I appreciate Mrs X believes her business was entitled to the £25,000 RHL grant I have seen no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it reached its decision; we cannot therefore criticise it.
  6. The Council’s decision is in-line with the guidance quoted above and it confirms it sought advice from the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy to inform its approach. The RHL grant scheme targeted businesses with properties that were wholly or mainly being used for the sale of goods and/or provision of services to visiting members of the public and unfortunately Mrs X's business did not meet the criteria. The Council could not therefore award Mrs X a RHL grant.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council affecting its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings