-
Case ref:201501567
-
Date:September 2015
-
Body:Glasgow City Council
-
Sector:Local Government
-
Outcome:Some upheld, action taken by body to remedy, no recommendations
-
Subject:communication, staff attitude and confidentiality
Summary
Mr C complained to us on behalf of his client (Miss A) who had been refused an application made to the council for a crisis grant. The reasons for the refusal were that she had already received a grant in the preceding 28 days and her circumstances had not changed. Miss A requested a review of this decision, which was unsuccessful. In the response letter no reasons were given for the decision. Miss A then requested a second stage review, which was also unsuccessful, and again no reasons were provided in the response. Mr C then complained to us about the lack of reasoning provided. He also felt that the decision to not award a second grant within 28 days was not in line with Scottish Government guidance.
After our enquiries to the council, they accepted that there had been errors in providing reasoning and, as a result, agreed to overturn their decision and pay Miss A the grant. They also agreed to implement new processes to ensure that future decision letters contained detailed reasoning. However, they maintained that their decision-making with regards to her repeat application had been correct. On consulting the Scottish Government guidance, we agreed that there had been failings with regards to the reasons provided but also that they had been correct in their assertion that a second grant should not be paid within 28 days. We believed that the actions they had already agreed to perform were reasonable and, as such, made no further recommendations.