ALMOST 2,000 people waiting to hear if they will get a grant to improve their homes are to have their applications cancelled by Blackburn Council.
The move follows changes in the law over how grant cash is handed out to the public.
And town hall bosses are locked in a row with a Government inspector over the case of a man who was refused an improvement grant even though an inspection declared his home "unfit for human habitation".
The council is refusing to pay the homeowner £500 compensation even though his complaint has been upheld by a Government inspector.
Blackburn Council were reported to the Government Ombudsman for taking two years to refuse the man's application for a home improvement grant.
Despite the Ombudsman finding the council guilty of maladministration housing chiefs are still refusing to pay the compensation.
And the council is now planning to bring in a new system of dealing with grant applications.
The homeowner who originally bought the complaint will now get a grant of £20,000 to carry out desperately needed repairs. Blackburn housing chiefs have blamed the Government for leaving them short of funds.
A town hall spokesman said: "The council is of the opinion that there has not been any injustice in this case.
"There are over 1,500 inquiries for renovation grants and they are dealt with in order, using the limited resources provided by central government.
"The current backlog is £20 million and the annual budget is a little over £1 million."
A new way of dealing with improvement grants is expected to be introduced at the next housing committee.
Housing chairman Sue Reid said: "The major change in legislation is to move from a system of mandatory grants, with insufficient cash to support them, to a system of discretionary grants.
"It is recommended that the committee agrees all inquiries for renovation grants that have not been income tested be cancelled and that no further applications are accepted.
"A personal letter will be sent to all householders in the current backlog explaining the implications."
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article