Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his applications for grants for businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council has awarded him one COVID-19 business grant per scheme when he believes he is entitled to three.

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. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by the @complainant @and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Background

7. Mr X runs three holiday lets. He applied to the Council for grants for each of the three properties under the Government’s various schemes for businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. He is unhappy the Council only awarded him one grant per scheme and believes the Council should have awarded him three.
8. The Council has explained the grants apply per ‘hereditament’, as set out in the government guidance, and because the three holiday lets are included within the same entry on the Valuation Office Agency’s rating list he is only entitled to one grant. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision.

Back to top

My assessment

9. The Council has awarded Mr X grants but the issue is the number of grants awarded in each case. The government guidance allows local authorities to award more than one grant to a business but this only applies where the premises are separately rated. The rating list shows Mr X’s three holiday lets are all included within the same entry on the list and Mr X is therefore only entitled to one grant.
10. Had the properties been rated separately, as they have in the past, Mr X may have been able to claim for more than one grant. But the current entry creates eligibility for only one grant per scheme and has applied since 2017. If Mr X felt this was wrong he should have raised the issue with the Valuation Office Agency at the time.
11. The Council has used its judgement in applying the government guidance and there is no evidence of fault in the way it reached its decisions.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman