Example
C applied for a crisis grant after losing their money when the property they were staying in was damaged during a storm.
The Council declined the application on the basis that C had already received assistance under similar circumstances, and that C was at fault.
We reviewed the Council’s file and spoke with C. We noted that C had only received two awards in the past twelve-month period. We considered C’s reason for their crisis along with the supporting information they provided. We did not have enough evidence to enable us to make a robust decision per 4.21 of the guidance. Therefore, we did not change the Council’s decision.
C then asked for a reconsideration. They explained that they had withdrawn all their benefit payment and that losing money due to a storm was an ‘act of God’. They provided photos of the storm damage, but we assessed that these were not photos of the property they referred to in their application. The new SPSO decision-maker agreed with the original decision not to award the grant.
Feedback for the Council
- An assessment of the 28-day exclusion should have been carried out.
- The Council did not carry out any enquiries to establish what had happened to C’s funds.
- The Council did not correctly follow the decision-making steps set out at 5.4 of the guidance.