Office closure

We will be closed on Monday 5 May for the public holiday. You can still request a review via our online form but we will not respond until we reopen.

New Customer Service Standards

We have updated our Customer Service Standards and are looking for feedback from customers. Please fill out our survey here by 12 May 2025: https://forms.office.com/e/ZDpjibqe8r 

Case study

  • Date:
    April 2024
  • Category:
    High most compelling priority rating

Example

C asked for an independent review of the council's decision on their community care grant application. C requested several items to set up their new tenancy. They had moved to the area following a period of homelessness in a different council area. 

The council initially declined the application as the applicant was not on a low income at the time of the application. At first tier review, they established the applicant was no longer working. They assessed that C was therefore eligible and qualified for a grant under the 'exceptional pressure' criterion. The council assessed that a single bed and cooker met their rating of 'high most compelling', and declined the remaining items. 

We reviewed the council's file and corresponded with C and their GP. 

We assessed that

  • C's health issues increased the priority need for a double bed and a washing machine to 'high most compelling'. C had chronic pain from a chest issue, which their GP verified could be more easily managed by having a double bed. The GP also verified that C had incontinence that required use of a washing machine in their home, and
  • in considering the application, the council could have made further enquiries with C about the impact of their health issues prior to carrying out their priority assessment.

We also noted that the timescales were not met at the original decision stage.

Updated: April 17, 2024