Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the West Midlands Combined Authority’s decision not to approve his application for funding for an investment project. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the West Midlands Combined Authority (“the Authority”) encouraged him to incur costs toward his investment project before eventually deciding it would not fund the project. He says the Authority has caused him significant financial loss and distress and inconvenience.
2. Mr X is seeking accountability from the Authority and reimbursement of the costs he has incurred.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X applied for funding for his investment project in 2022. Throughout the following year, the Authority considered the application and carried out its own assessments as to the viability of the plans.
7. In late 2023, the Authority confirmed it would be unable to fund Mr X’s project and explained its reasons for this.
8. Mr X says the Authority encouraged him to incur costs before making its decision.
9. The Authority says it was always clear with Mr X that no decision had been reached before October 2023. It says Mr X knew that any costs he incurred before this decision was at his own risk.
10. Ultimately, the Authority has made a decision it is entitled to make. It is not at fault for thoroughly considering Mr X’s proposal before it reached its decision.
11. In the absence of evidence that the Authority told Mr X funding was certain, any costs he has incurred were in the knowledge there was a risk involved.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman