Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about COVID-19-related business grants. Much of the complaint is late, without good reason to accept it now. It is more appropriate for the courts to decide whether Mrs X should receive the compensation she seeks.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council did not pay her business COVID-19-related grants. She says this caused stress and led to the business having to close.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
5. 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, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and information about when government COVID-19-related business grant schemes ended.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. The government’s COVID-19-related business grant schemes ended by March 2022. Some of them ended considerably earlier, in 2020 and 2021. Mrs X knew at the time of the grant schemes that she was dissatisfied her business had not received grants. Mrs X complained to us in July 2023, so the restriction in paragraph 3 applies to most of the matters complained of.
9. Mrs X says she understood she had to pursue matters with the Council first. That is correct, but we would not normally expect it to take more than about three months to complete a Council’s complaint procedure or equivalent. As the complaint is on behalf of a business, we would expect Mrs X (or someone else representing the business) to inform themselves about how to complain to the Council and to us and to progress matters quickly if the business was so seriously affected. Information was readily available online. If Mrs X believed the Council was taking unreasonably long to deal with matters, she could have approached us.
10. The Council told Mrs X about the Ombudsman in May 2022, although even then some points complained of would have been late. I understand there was some delay in the Council’s complaint procedure in 2022. However, in November the Council told Mrs X if she was dissatisfied, she should go to the Ombudsman. In April 2023, Mrs X told the Council she still needed more details before she could come to the Ombudsman. She continued corresponding with the Council before coming to us in July 2023. There was no need for that. Mrs X knew she had complained to the Council, and she knew in November 2022 the Council had advised she could complain to the Ombudsman.
11. I understand Mrs X has been ill at times. I also appreciate that dealing with the business’ difficulties would have been time-consuming. However, I am not persuaded those points amount to grounds for us to accept the complaint late now, given the length of time involved. Mrs X refers to other family members involved in running the business. I consider a complaint could reasonably have been made much sooner.
12. In October 2022 Within the last 12 months, Mrs X learned some other businesses had recently received more support from the Council. I understand this was from the COVID-19 Additional Relief Fund (CARF). That was not a grant fund, but a fund to discount business rates. Government guidance said councils could not use CARF to support businesses who had received retail rates discount. Mrs X does not dispute her business had received the latter. So, it is unlikely any investigation of this point would find fault by the Council.
13. Even if the points in paragraphs 8 to 11 above did not apply, there are other reasons we should not investigate this complaint.
14. Mrs X blames the Council’s alleged fault (not paying grants of around £160,000) for the failure of her business. She states the business had to close and she had to sell some premises in poorer condition than she would otherwise have done, so she sold for less than the market value, which she says would have been about £180,000. Mrs X wants compensation for the claimed impact on her business and for the worry and distress caused to her and to other people running the business.
15. The courts can consider compensation claims, so the restriction in paragraph 4 applies. The Ombudsman does not award compensation in the way the courts can. There might be a cost to court action but that, in itself, does not automatically make it unreasonable to expect Mrs X to go to court rather than have the Ombudsman investigate. It is clear Mrs X wants compensation for both alleged direct losses (not receiving the grants) and alleged indirect or consequential economic losses (the claimed impact on her business’s financial position and ability to operate). Such claims are not straightforward legally. It is more appropriate for the courts than the Ombudsman to decide liability, damages and remedy in such matters.
16. Also, the grants Mrs X says her business should have received would have been grants payable to the business while it was trading. It is unlikely we would ask the Council to make equivalent payments now the business is no longer trading. The question of whether the Council owes money to the business is more appropriately for the courts, in the circumstances.

Back to top

Final decision

17. I appreciate Mrs X and her family are in a very difficult situation. However, we will not investigate this complaint. Much of the complaint is late, without good reason to accept it now. It is more appropriate for the courts to decide whether Mrs X should receive the compensation she seeks. It is unlikely any investigation by us would achieve what Mrs X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman