Summary: Mr X complained the Council was responsible for a significant delay deciding his application for a COVID-19 discretionary business grant, and did not respond to his requests for updates. Mr X also complained about being charged council tax, and about the Council’s complaint procedure. The Council was at fault for delays resulting from its poor communication with Mr X. The Council was not at fault for charging Mr X council tax, or over its complaint procedure.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council was responsible for a significant delay deciding his application for a COVID-19 discretionary business grant, and did not respond to his requests for updates.
2. Mr X said the Council refused his grant application and unreasonably still asked him to pay council tax despite him being unable to work due to the COVID-19 pandemic. He said this was inconsistent with the rules for self-employed people at the time.
3. Mr X also considered the Council discriminated against him by insisting he must complain online.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
6. 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

7. As part of the investigation, I considered the complaint and the information Mr X provided.
8. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
9. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s Hospitality, Leisure and Retail (Expanded Scheme) grant

10. The Council set up the Hospitality, Leisure and Retail (Expanded Scheme) grant in conjunction with neighbouring councils. I will refer to it as the ‘grant scheme’.
11. The grant scheme was set up for business in the hospitality and leisure sectors, and their supply chains, who were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. For a home-based applicant to be eligible, they had to work mainly in, or supply, the hospitality and leisure sectors. Applicants also had to show their business was trading on or before 11 March 2020 and was still trading on or before 1 October 2020.
12. Applicants had to provide bank statements and utility bills, and evidence of three of the following:
• Existing contract with accountant/solicitor for professional advice.
• Business related insurance.
• Costs related to licenses or professional certification.
• Hire purchase or finance leases for business equipment.
• Costs of membership of trade or professional bodies.
• Business expenses claimed through tax returns.

Council tax support

13. Council tax support is available to residents on low income or claiming benefits. It can help pay some or all their council tax.
14. The amount of support a person receives will depend on their age, income, savings, who they live with, and what benefits they receive.
15. Residents can apply for council tax support online, in writing, by telephone, or in person at a Council one stop shop.

The Council’s complaint procedure

16. You can make a formal complaint to the Council online (using its dedicated forms), in writing, by email, by telephone, or in person (by visiting a one stop shop).
17. Where appropriate, the Council says it will help people to use its complaint procedure.

The Equality Act 2010

18. The Equality Act provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all.
19. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010.
20. The reasonable adjustment duty is set out in the Equality Act 2010 and applies to any body which carries out a public function. It aims to make sure that a disabled person can use a service as close as it is reasonably possible to get to the standard usually offered to non-disabled people.
21. Service providers are under a positive and proactive duty to take steps to remove or prevent obstacles to accessing their service. If the adjustments are reasonable, they must make them.

What happened

22. I have detailed below some key events leading to Mr X’s complaint. This is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
23. Mr X is a self-employed interpreter and document translator. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, he was unable to work.
24. Mr X does not own a computer, so he could not apply for the grant scheme online. An officer took details for Mr X’s application by telephone in December 2020. The officer then wrote to Mr X, confirming the details of their conversation. The officer asked Mr X to check and confirm agreement to those details before the officer submitted his application. The officer also told Mr X he needed to send supporting documents.
25. In April 2021, Mr X said he telephoned the officer who took his application. He left a message asking for an update, but did not hear back. He phoned the Council twice more in April. Each time his details were passed to the grants team, but Mr X did not receive a call back or an update.
26. Mr X made a formal complaint in writing on 24 April 2021. He sent his letter to the Chief Executive. He set out what happened with his grant application and his subsequent attempts to contact the Council for updates.
27. When the Council did not respond, Mr X complained to the Ombudsman in December 2021. We asked the Council to investigate.
28. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint on 6 April 2022. It apologised for the time taken to review Mr X’s application and for the lack of response to his enquiries the previous year. It said it received a high volume of applications and could not respond to all enquiries. But it recognised it should have kept Mr X informed.
29. The Council also wrote to Mr X on 6 April 2022 confirming its decision on his grant scheme application. The Council said Mr X was unsuccessful because he did not have evidence his business was trading during the time of the grant scheme. Plus, his evidence did not show his business worked mainly in, or supplied, the hospitality and leisure sectors.

My investigation

30. The Council told me it submitted Mr X’s grant scheme application in December 2020, but it has no record Mr X sent supporting evidence. The Council therefore considered the application was incomplete.
31. Mr X told me he provided bank statements, utility bills and HMRC self-assessment forms for his application in December 2020. He posted the documents to the Council and has proof of postage.
32. The Council said its grant scheme appraisers did not have to chase applicants for missing information. The onus was on the applicant. However, in practice, appraisers were contacting applicants by email to request missing evidence or clarify details.
33. The Council accepted it has no record one of its appraisers contacted Mr X to request the missing evidence. The Council’s records show Mr X’s application remained ‘suspended’ and undetermined after the scheme closed.
34. The Council said it managed about 7,000 grant applications between 2020 and 2022. Its appraisers did not have time to maintain regular or direct contact with applicants. The Council said it is likely, due to the pressures of managing the grant schemes, its team failed to respond to Mr X’s enquiries about his application.
35. The Council said the experience Mr X describes about his complaint is not consistent with the Council’s procedures. People can complain by phone, in person, and in writing.
36. After receiving Mr X’s complaint, the Council said an officer contacted him to explain the grants process and talk him through the information needed to complete his application. The officer remained in contact with Mr X until the Council reached a decision on his application.
37. The Council told me it could not reduce or waive council tax during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, people can ask for support if they are struggling to pay. The Council includes this information on its tax bills. It has no record of Mr X asking for support.
38. Mr X said he had not applied for council tax relief.

Analysis

39. There was clearly delay by the Council in deciding Mr X’s grant scheme application. He applied in December 2020, but the Council did not make a decision until April 2022. That is far too long. I cannot say, on the evidence seen, whether Mr X sent all the evidence the Council needed when he posted back his application form. The fact the Council did receive the completed form, but could not make a decision, suggests not.
40. However, the Council’s appraisers were contacting people for missing information. The Council should therefore have contacted Mr X. Whether this was an oversight, or because Mr X did not have an email address, I cannot say. I consider it was fault by the Council not to contact Mr X.
41. Mr X tried to get updates from the Council in April 2021. I do not doubt the Council was busy in this period, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but it should have responded to Mr X. I have not seen any justification not to. Again, I consider the Council was at fault here. The Council missed an opportunity to resolve matters at that stage.
42. Mr X complained in December 2021. He provided proof of postage of his letter. The Council did not respond. That was fault and another missed opportunity. Mr X had to complain to us in order to get a response from the Council.
43. Council tax remained payable during the COVID-19 pandemic. There were no set exemptions for people working in sectors which had to close. Instead, people could apply for council tax support, but Mr X did not do so. The Council was therefore not at fault by asking Mr X to pay council tax.
44. I did not see evidence the Council asked Mr X to complain online. The Council’s website and complaint procedure make clear that residents can also complain in writing or in person. Mr X did complain in writing. While the Council did not respond I have not seen evidence this was discrimination, more likely an oversight. The fact the Council took Mr X’s grant scheme application by phone showed its willingness to support him to access its services.
45. When the Council decided Mr X’s grant scheme application in 2022, it kept him updated by telephone. It then sent its decision in writing, along with its complaint response. I did not see evidence of fault in this regard or failure to make reasonable adjustments.
46. Ultimately, Mr X was not eligible for the Council’s grant scheme. That is the Council’s decision to make. While I consider the Council was at fault for poor communication, I have not seen evidence the Council failed to properly consider Mr X’s application and evidence when it eventually made its decision. Mr X’s injustice is therefore limited to frustration caused by the Council’s delays, and the time and trouble incurred complaining in order for the Council to make a decision.

Back to top

Agreed action

47. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council will:
• Apologise to Mr X in writing for failing to contact him for further evidence, failing to respond to his requests for updates, and failing to respond to his complaint.
• Acknowledge the frustration its fault caused.
• Pay Mr X £100 to recognise the avoidable time and trouble he incurred seeking updates and complaining before the Council decided his grant application.
48. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

49. I completed my investigation. The Council was at fault for delays resulting from its poor communication with Mr X. I did not find the Council at fault for charging Mr X council tax, or over its complaint procedure.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman