Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to properly advise him about a COVID-19 business grant scheme. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council and its actions did not cause Mr X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council failed to provide sufficient information about a COVID-19 business grant scheme. He says he has lost income as a result of the pandemic but has still had to pay costs associated with his business.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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”.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

Background

6. Mr X contacted the Council in April 2021 to ask about any new business grant schemes which he may be able to apply for. The Council replied to his email on 29 April and told him a new grant scheme would open soon but it could not confirm the date. It told him to keep checking its website and that it believed the new scheme would open “in early May”.
7. Mr X says he checked the Council’s website but could find no details of the scheme. He emailed the Council again to query this on 18 May 2021 but was told the scheme had opened on 30 April and closed to new applications on 14 May. Mr X is unhappy he missed the opportunity to apply and believes the Council knew when the scheme would open but intentionally did not tell him in order to stop him from applying.

Back to top

My assessment

8. There is no evidence of fault by the Council or to show that its advice prevented Mr X from applying for the grant scheme and obtaining a grant.
9. The Council’s advice to keep checking its website was appropriate in the circumstances and although the scheme opened one day earlier than the Council suggested in its email this did not have any impact on Mr X. Had he viewed the correct section of the website on 1 May, or checked social media as he had previously been advised, he would or should have been able to find details about the scheme and could still have applied. There is nothing to show the Council’s advice prevented Mr X from applying.
10. It is Mr X’s responsibility to keep up to date about the grant schemes available and we could not reasonably say the Council must pay Mr X the grant now. Local authorities operate the grant schemes but the money for these grants come from central government; there is therefore no benefit to the Council or reason for it to mislead Mr X intentionally to stop him from applying.
11. Mr X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council or to show its actions caused Mr X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman