Summary: The Council failed to have regard to its own policy when it said Mr X was not eligible for emergency financial support. The Council also failed to properly consider offering any reasonable adjustments for Mr X due to his disability. These faults caused Mr X uncertainty and led to a missed opportunity for him to apply for financial support. As a remedy, the Council has agreed to consider any new application by Mr X for emergency support and for any eligible support to be backdated to his initial call date. The Council has also agreed to carry out a service improvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to have due regard to the Equality Act when he contacted it to apply for financial support.
2. He said this caused him distress and meant the Council did not properly consider his application.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the relevant law and guidance as set out below.
7. I considered our Guidance on Remedies.
8. I considered comments made by Mr X and the Council on a draft decision before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

Equality Act

9. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. It provides the UK with discrimination law which protects individuals from unfair treatment and promotes a fair and more equal society. It places a duty on local public services to anticipate the needs of people with disabilities accessing their services.
10. In our focus report “Equal Access, Getting it Right for People with Disabilities, May 2022” we set out our expectation that local services do this whenever they interact with service users, whether this is the first time a person has used the service or not.

Reasonable adjustments

11. The reasonable adjustment duty is set out in the Equality Act and applies to any body which carries out a public function. The Act lists the relevant protected characteristics which include disability.
12. 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.
13. When the duty arises, 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.
14. In our focus report we explain that by asking service users if they need to make any changes to how they communicate, local services can provide people with disabilities an opportunity to discuss any barriers they might face accessing the service, and possible solutions.
15. We cannot say what adjustments should be made in a particular circumstance. But we can find fault when councils fail to show they have properly considered whether to make reasonable adjustments.

Emergency Assistance policy, East Riding of Yorkshire Council

16. The Council’s policy says, “East Riding of Yorkshire Council's emergency assistance scheme aims to help residents if there has been an interruption to their normal income”.
17. “Emergency assistance may be awarded to an applicant who:
• has their main residence within the East Riding of Yorkshire Council boundary 
• is aged 16 or over and no-one receives child benefit for them 
• is without the resources to meet their or their family's immediate short-term needs
• is unable to afford basic household items and meets the prescribed circumstances
• has had an interruption to their regular income.”
18. The policy goes on to say, ”should your application be unsuccessful, and you feel that the decision has been made incorrectly, you have the right to request we review the decision.”

What happened

19. On 1 September 2022, Mr X called the Council to find out if he was entitled to any support through the Council’s emergency assistance scheme.
20. When he got through to a Council officer, he said he had been waiting a long time for the call to be answered and this had negatively affected him as he is autistic.
21. The Council officer did not ask Mr X if he required any reasonable adjustments to how they were communicating due to his disability, at this point, or at any other stage in the phone call.
22. Mr X informed the officer that when he became a pensioner in August 2022, his benefits were stopped. He said he was now eligible to claim pension credit, but would have to wait six weeks for the first payment from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
23. He said because of this disruption to his income, he could no longer afford to eat or pay his utility bills and that he had been eating dog food. He said he tried to apply online but the online form was not working.
24. The Council officer asked him when he last received any income and he said he received an employment and support allowance (ESA) payment for the last time, one month earlier.
25. The officer put Mr X on hold briefly and said when they returned they could do the application together over the phone.
26. When the officer returned, they asked Mr X whether he was still receiving Personal Independence Payment (PIP). He said he was, and the officer said he did not mention at the beginning of the call that he was receiving another benefit.
27. Mr X became frustrated and said his communication needs due to his autism were not being properly considered during the call. The Council officer said to Mr X that it was clear he had income coming in and ended the call.
28. Mr X provided us with the call recording of this conversation.

My findings

Failure to offer reasonable adjustments

29. The Council was made aware by Mr X at the beginning of the phone call that he had a disability and that because of this, the Council’s delay answering the call was distressing. The Council had a duty under the Equality Act to consider making reasonable adjustments to help him use the service. The Council did not do this. The Council was at fault.
30. This fault caused Mr X uncertainty as to whether he would have been better supported by the service, had his communication needs been properly considered.

Failure to have regard to Council policy

31. The Council told Mr X he did not qualify for support from the Emergency Assistance Scheme because he had an income from PIP. The Council’s policy does not say that anyone who receives benefits is not eligible. It does say that people may be eligible if they have had an ‘interruption to their regular income’, which Mr X said he had.
32. Mr X clearly wanted to challenge the officer’s decision during the call, but the officer did not tell Mr X how he could make a formal application for emergency assistance, or that if he disagreed with their decision, he could appeal it, despite this being within the Council’s policy.
33. The Council failed to have regard to its own policy when it advised Mr X during this phone call. The Council was at fault.
34. This fault led to a missed opportunity for Mr X to apply for financial support he may have been eligible for. I have recommended a remedy to put Mr X in the position he would have been in, if not for this fault.

Back to top

Agreed action

35. Within one month of the date of the final decision, the Council has agreed to demonstrate that it has:
• apologised to Mr X for not having regard to its own policy when it advised him over the phone regarding the Emergency Assistance Scheme, and for failing to consider making reasonable adjustments for him during this call;
• advised Mr X on how he can make an application now, if he wishes, for support through the Emergency Assistance Scheme and demonstrate that the Council has considered whether to make reasonable adjustments for him if needed to make the application; and
• determined whether Mr X would have been eligible for any support through the Emergency Assistance Scheme, that he did not receive, when he called the Council on 1 September 2022. If so, any support should be backdated accordingly. If the Council needs to communicate with Mr X to determine this, it should consider making any appropriate reasonable adjustments to how it communicates with him.
36. Within three months of the date of the final decision, the Council has agreed to demonstrate that it has:
• reminded all Council staff that the Equality Act duty is proactive and anticipatory, so reasonable adjustments must be considered as soon as the Council becomes aware that a person has a disability, whether they specifically ask for the adjustments or not. If the adjustments requested are reasonable, it should put these in place.
37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

38. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to injustice and the Council has agreed to apologise, carry out a service improvement, and re-consider Mr X’s eligibility for financial support.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman