Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a government grant for businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council wrongly refused his application for a £10,000 grant from the government’s Small Business Grant Fund (SBGF).

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 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

4. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s response. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and invited 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 depended on its eligibility for certain business rate reliefs on 11 March 2020 and the rateable value of its hereditament (business premises). Grants were awarded in respect of the hereditament to contribute to the business’s ongoing costs and only one grant could be awarded per hereditament. Government guidance clearly states that grants will be given to “The person who according to the billing authority’s records was the ratepayer in respect of the hereditament on the 11 March 2020.”
7. Mr X runs a business owned by a third party which he operates from their premises. The third party is directly liable for costs relating to the premises, including business rates and rent. Mr X has entered into an agreement with the third party to purchase the business but the sale has not yet been completed. He was not liable for business rates and was not in receipt of small business rate relief on 11 March 2020.
8. Mr X contacted the Council in July 2020 to register as the business rate payer and to enquire about the SBGF and his eligibility for a grant. He later made a formal application for a grant which the Council refused. This was because it had already awarded a grant in respect of the hereditament to the business owner and could not award a second grant to Mr X.
9. Mr X believes the Council has awarded the grant to the wrong person and considers he is eligible for it. He provided copies of his agreement with the third party to purchase the business, his business insurance, invoices and a copy of his bank statement, along with evidence showing he has occupied and traded from the premises for some time.
10. The Council considers it correctly awarded the grant to the business owner. It has explained how it reached this view and it is not for us to question its judgement. The Council has clearly considered the Government’s guidance and I have seen no evidence of fault in the way it reached its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman