I recently applied for a Sure Start Maternnity Grant and received a decision from the DWP today, declining my eligibility; under the basis that there is another child (under 16) in my family/ household. My situation is this, I am co-habitating with my partner/ father of my new/ first baby. Within the last 10 months, my partner's daughter from previous relationship (age 13) had to be removed from her mothers care, owing to domestic violence issues. The family Courts are still dealing with the situation as her mother is contesting her daughter residing with us, as she wants her to return to her home/ care - so obviously there is Social Services involved etc. prior to this situation arising, my partners daughter, had always resided with her mother and my partner, had regular access etc. I have cited the Sure Start Maternity Grant Act/ Policy and the more recently published 'Restricting payment of the SSMG to first child only ' - I have to say, both have left me further confused as if you read the 'restricting payment policy/ in one paragraph, it states that in a situation where a woman has her first child and another child under 16, residing in same household/ family and is from the partners 'previous relationship' this would be considered a 'first child' and will be eligible for payment of grant. If however, the reverse applies (ie: it is the 'father/ partner' first child, then payment would not be made. This seems pretty straightforward, but then the policy starts to contradict itself and goes on to define, the only exception for payment to more than one child, is in the case of the child living in same household, is not from partner. Or if you are adopting a child under 1 year old/ special guardianship etc, then you are eligible. It does not offer the scenario of any child in household under 16, from partner previous relationship being acceptable? Can anybody please clarify this point please??? I want to challenge the decision/ request a Mandatory Reconsideration - but wanted to include my reasoning/ the point of law they have not applied correctly? Any help advice / greatly appreciated. thank you

I just spoke to the LGO enquiry line. I asked about the frequency in publishing their decisions online? They said: quote "we dont publish all decisions, those that we do publish are posted online in batches, every 3 months (on the closest Wednesday to the 3 mth period?). If this is correct, then it really allows them to 'cherry pick' which decisions they publish, putting them in a good light - or appearing impartial? The whole point I have with my own particular complaint/ referral to LGO/ their decision/ their decision review - is that I feel they have clearly been biased towards me in reaching what I consider to be a very unfair decision and have not defended my rights - owing to their prejudice toward me? (if that makes sense). I thought the idea of publishing decisions online, was to show transparancy, fairness and imparitiality in their investigative processes and decision making? This seems to indicate otherwise? Confusing?????

That's strange? I wonder if they have a schedule for publishing decisions in batches? eg: decisions published every 20 days etc? I shall make enquiries and report back here as to my findings? BRB ..................... thank you

Thank you for your response, sorry it taken a while for me to revisit and respond accordingly. Anyway, your suggestion re the published Ombudsman Decisions, is an excellent idea and I am happy to provide the reference for you to view it online - the reference is : Complaint against: London Borough of Bromley Complaint Reference: 16 010 559 Date: 27 March 2018 I look forward to your feedback after reading the complaint/ decision, after which there are a few points I will raise, which has meant my not being treated fairly - but I shall wait until you have had the opportunity to read through first. I look forward to your response in due course Many thanks

Hi there - hope somebody may be able to help? It is in relation to the Local Government Ombudsmen - Decision Review? Following a complaint to my local authority, which dragged on for approx 16 months at Stage 1 and they refused to allow me to access my rights to progress to Stage 2 of the Statutory Complaints Procedure, I referred the matter to the LGO. Long story short, I was not happy with the LGO decision in finding no fault in the Council's actions. I then used the 'LGO DECISION REVIEW PROCESS' to voice the fact I was not happy with this decision and that it was unfair and there had been bias used against me etc. This did not result in any change of decision, the original LGO decision stood and I am told I have no further rights to challenge the LGO decision/ you only have one shot at requesting a review of the decision? I am trying to find out if this is the end of the road for challenging their decision, or is there any other route I can take for this decision to be properly investigated and the merits of their decision scrutinised? This seems so unfair as my complaint still unresolved and I now have no faith in a 'flawed statutory complaints procedure' if it does not live up to what it claims to do? Any advice would be greatly appreciated............many thanks