Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about poor workmanship in relation to disabled adaptations. This is because the complaint is late. There is no evidence Mrs X could not have complained sooner and no good reason for us to investigate now.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the quality of works completed using a disabled facilities grant (DFG) in March 2015. She said faults in the electrical and gas installations put her late mother’s safety at risk. The Council has since carried out remedial works, has offered to pay her £1500 for her distress and inconvenience and has offered to reimburse her for electrical works if she provides appropriate evidence. However, Mrs X considers this is not enough, particularly as the poor works meant the family’s heating bills have been higher than they should have been since 2015.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:
• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council agreed to carry out disabled adaptations, funded by a disabled facilities grant (DFG), including an extension to provide a bedroom and wet room for Mrs X’s mother, Mrs Y, who lived with Mrs X, and to replace the kitchen. The works were completed in March 2015.
8. Mrs X complained about the quality of the work in November 2017, by which time Mrs Y had died. The Council addressed the issues she raised at that point and told her she could complain to us if she remained unhappy in February 2018. There is no evidence she could not complain to us at that point. Therefore, we will not investigate the issues raised in 2017 as that part of the complaint is late and there is no good reason to investigate now.
9. When further work was carried out on the property in 2020, the contractor identified issues with the gas and electricity installations. Mrs X made a further complaint and the Council responded in April 2021. It said it had sought advice about the difference in temperature in the extension, compared to the rest of the house, which suggested this was due to the extension not having the same external cladding as the rest of the house. Mrs X did not accept that explanation. The Council again told her she could complain to us if she remained unhappy.
10. Subsequently, the Council arranged for a thermal imaging report to be produced, which showed heat loss from within the extension. Following this, it arranged for extensive remedial work to be carried out, which was completed between March and July 2023. In September the Council offered to pay Mrs X £1,500 to remedy the disruption and distress caused. It also said it would reimburse the cost of electrical work if Mrs X provided specific evidence of this.
11. The time for receiving complaints is from when someone became aware of the matter they wish to complain about, not when they complained to the Council, or it issued its final response. We would expect someone to complain to us within a year. Mrs X was aware of the issues with the temperature in the extension and was signposted to us in April 2021. There is no evidence she could not complain to us earlier. Therefore, this part of the complaint is also late.
12. In any case, even if the complaint was not late, we would not investigate because:
1. we would not be critical of the Council for not identifying the problem sooner. It did take steps to address the concern about the temperature difference and the advice it received was that it related to the absence of external cladding on the extension. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement, and therefore we would not recommend the Council reimburses Mrs X for additional heating costs; and
2. since identifying the reason for the heat loss, the Council has carried out remedial work. In addition, it has offered to pay Mrs X £1,500 to remedy the distress and disruption caused, which is in line with our Guidance on Remedies. Although I acknowledge Mrs X is unhappy with the payment offered, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is late. The Council has carried out remedial work and has offered a payment to remedy the injustice caused. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman