Case study

  • Date:
    September 2022
  • Category:
    Meeting the need


C asked for an independent review of the council’s decision. They had applied for a crisis grant after they had stopped working. They had applied for Universal Credit (UC) and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) but were yet to receive a payment. C advised they had no money to cover their immediate living costs.

The council assessed that the application met the conditions for a grant and awarded £101.92 at initial decision. They calculated this using the Income Support rate for a householder aged over 25 years old for a duration of 16 days as this was when they deemed that their UC was due to be paid. C requested a first tier review of the decision and asked for additional funds, stating that the amount awarded was not sufficient. The first tier decision maker awarded an additional £191.10, noting that C’s UC would not be paid until a month later.  Therefore, C received a total award of £293.02 for a duration of 46 days.

We reviewed the council’s case file and contacted C by email for further information. C advised the amount of £293.02 was not sufficient, as they had used their crisis grant payment for their mortgage payment. We assessed that the council had awarded the correct duration as C’s crisis period was 46 days. However, we noted that the council had used historic Income Support rates. Based on current rates, C should have been awarded £303.60. Therefore, we instructed the council to award an additional £10.58. We explained to C the purpose of the SWF and that it is intended to provide support with immediate living costs and on-going expenses, such as mortgage payments, cannot be supported. We provided the council with feedback relating to the incorrect rates when calculating the award amount.

Updated: September 16, 2022