Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for a Test and Trace Support Payment. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains the Council did not properly assess her application for a Test and Trace Support Payment. She says she suffered financial loss from not being able to work and believes she was entitled to the £500 payment.

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 Ms X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I shared my draft decision with Ms X and invited her comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. In November 2020 it was a legal requirement to self-isolate if told by NHS Test and Trace to do so. To help workers on low incomes who were affected by self-isolation the Government introduced a £500 Test and Trace Support Payment. The scheme was administered by local authorities which checked for compliance with the criteria and paid eligible workers directly.
6. The standard scheme applied to workers receiving one of seven specified benefits. For those who did not receive one of these benefits there was an alternative scheme. This required the worker to have:
• Worked for 16 hours or more per week before the self-isolation period; and,
• Earned less than £350 per week gross (before deductions) prior to self-isolation, and for income to have reduced significantly due to the self-isolation; and,
• Less than £6,000 capital available, for example in the bank or building society.
7. Ms X was told to self-isolate by NHS Test and Trace in November 2020 after coming into contact with someone who tested positive for COVID-19. She suffered a loss of income as a result of her self-isolation and applied for a Test and Trace Support Payment from the Council.
8. The Council refused Ms X’s application as her income in the weeks before her self-isolation exceeded £350 per week gross.
9. Ms X believes the Council’s decision was wrong. She asked for a review but the Council confirmed its decision not to award her a payment. It set out its calculations of her income over the period prior to her self-isolation and this exceeded the limit of £350 per week.
10. I have seen no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered Ms X’s application for a Test and Trace Support Payment. The Council requested further information from Ms X and used this to explain its decision. Ms X suggests the Council should look at her income over the period including her self-isolation but this is not how income is calculated.

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