Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that the Council wrongly decided not to refer a claimed split in her business premises to the Valuation Office Agency. This is because the decision did not cause Miss X injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains the Council wrongly decided her business premises were not separate from those of her landlord. As a result it did not refer her premises to the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) to be separately rated. Miss X believes this has caused her to miss out on a £10,000 government grant for small 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’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Background

6. 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.
7. Miss X took over the running of an existing business in early 2020. As part of the agreement for the business Miss X took on part of her landlord’s premises and believed she would be liable for business rates for it. She says she, her landlord, the property agents and her solicitors all expected the VOA to split the premises on the rating list to create two separate entries but this process is not automatic.
8. Miss X contacted the Council on 30 March 2020 to ask why she had not received an invoice for business rates and the Council sent an inspector to her business premises the following day. They explained the premises were, in their view, not separate from those of her landlord and would not therefore be rated separately by the VOA.
9. Miss X complained about the decision but did not pursue the matter at the time. She applied for and received a discretionary grant from the Council, along with other grants, and complained again when the VOA agreed the split the premises in 2021. Miss X believes this is evidence the Council’s original decision not the split the premises was wrong and complains she has suffered financial loss as a result. This is because the discretionary grant was for half of the amount Miss X would have received under the small business grant scheme, had the premises been rated separately.

Back to top

My assessment

10. 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.
11. Guidance for the small business grant fund scheme clearly states:

“42. Any changes to the rating list (rateable value or to the hereditament) after the 11 March 2020 including changes which have been backdated to this date should be ignored for the purposes of eligibility.

43. Local Authorities are not required to adjust, pay or recover grants where the rating list is subsequently amended retrospectively to the 11 March 2020.”

12. Miss X’s premises were not separately listed on 11 March 2020 so even if the Council had decided they should be listed separately, and if the VOA had subsequently updated and backdated the rating list, this would not have entitled her to the grant. We cannot therefore say the Council’s actions, whether fault or not, wrongly affected her eligibility for a small business grant.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council’s actions did not cause Miss X injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman