The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council wrongly refused her application for a COVID-19 business grant. This is because there is no evidence of fault affecting its decision.
The complaint
The complainant, Mrs X, complains about the Council’s decision to reject her application for a government grant for businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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”.
We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Background
Mrs X runs a business which was closed in the early part of 2021 and opened to customers from May 2021. This was after the government had eased restrictions on the opening of premises used for hospitality and leisure.
Mrs X applied to the Council for a restart grant in April 2021. The purpose of this scheme was to support businesses in occupation of qualifying premises (hereditaments) to reopen following the requirement to close to help tackle the spread of COVID-19.
Government guidance stated: 23. Businesses must have been trading on 1 April 2021 to be eligible to receive funding under this scheme.
24. For the purposes of this grant scheme, a business is considered to be trading if it is engaged in business activity. This should be interpreted as carrying on a trade or profession, or buying and selling goods or services in order to general turnover… The guidance left the decision of whether a business was trading, and therefore eligible for a restart grant, at the discretion of the local authority administering the scheme.
My assessment
There is no dispute over the fact Mrs X’s business was not open to customers on 1 April 2021 and that full trade began in May 2021. However Mrs X believes that by taking bookings online, buying stock and having staff members visit the premises to prepare for opening satisfies the requirement for it to have been trading on 1 April.
The Council has considered the information Mrs X provided but it does not accept this meets the requirement to show it was “trading” for the purposes of the restart grant scheme on 1 April 2021. The Council’s decision is based on the specific circumstances involved in this case and its interpretation of the guidance and it is not for us to take our own view on the case. I have seen no evidence of fault in the way it was reached and it is neither irrational nor perverse; we cannot therefore criticise it.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman