Local Government Ombudsman
You are here: Home : : News and press : : 2009 : : October : : Two Councils’ failures over adaptations for disabled man

What's new

Downloads

Site tools

Two Councils’ failures over adaptations for disabled man

Archived press release

Date Published: 22/10/09

A disabled man was without suitable improved bathroom facilities for three years as a result of failure by Lincolnshire County Council and West Lindsey District Council.

A disabled man was without suitable improved bathroom facilities for three years as a result of failure by Lincolnshire County Council and West Lindsey District Council, finds Local Government Ombudsman, Anne Seex. In her report, issued today (22 October 2009) she says that “Mr J … almost certainly experienced … more pain as a result, and had to fight for a bathroom extension to meet his needs.”

‘Mr J’ (real names are not used for legal reasons) has acute haemophilia and severe arthritis. Knocks and bumps cause internal bleeding into his muscles and joints that are often swollen and painful.

Mr J first asked in May 2004 for his small bathroom to be extended so he could move around in his wheelchair without knocking against the fittings, shower during a bleed when he could not safely get into his bath and keep the bath so that he could, at other times, soak his joints to relieve pain. A scheme was not agreed until June 2007.

Mr J complained about the way that both Councils dealt with his application for a disabled facilities grant (DFG) and the way that the County Council assessed his needs.

The District Council has a duty to provide a DFG for works that are “…necessary and appropriate…” to meet a disabled persons needs and has to consult with the County Council as the social services authority. The County Council has a duty to assess needs and provide assistance that can include the cost of adaptations.

The Ombudsman found that Lincolnshire County Council:

  • failed to make comprehensive and accurate assessments that could translate into appropriate recommendations for adaptations; 
  • recommended adaptations that could not meet Mr J’s needs; 
  • failed to treat Mr J in accordance with the Good Practice Guide; 
  • failed to objectively and impartially review its position and take account of relevant information; 
  • made inadequate attempts to resolve Mr J’s complaint; and 
  • delayed in providing an independent occupational therapist.

She finds that West Lindsey District Council was slow to identify that it had allocated insufficient funds for DFGs, and delayed transferring funds into that budget.

She finds that both Councils failed to fulfil their responsibilities in reasonable timescales and communicate effectively with Mr J and each other.

The Ombudsman finds maladministration causing injustice and recommends that both Councils should apologise to Mr J and pay him a total of £4,500. The Councils should also provide the Ombudsman with copies of new joint policies and procedures for dealing with disputes about DFG provision and details of how staff are trained.

Report ref no 07C01269 & 07C09724