Summary: The Council was not at fault for liaising with the Borough Council to agree what adaptations are necessary for a property to be suitable for Miss X’s Disabled daughter.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained on behalf of her adult daughter Miss Y about the Council’s assessment of what is necessary for a property to meet Miss Y’s needs. In particular, Miss X says the Council changed its recommendations following discussion with the Borough Council. She says the amended recommendations will not meet Miss Y’s needs and as a result Miss Y will continue to live in a property which is not adapted to her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I spoke to Miss X about the complaint and considered the information she and the Council provided.
5. Miss X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

County and district councils

6. The area where Miss X lives is a “two-tier authority”. This means that some functions are the preserve of the County Council and others of the Borough Council.
7. The County Council is responsible for Social Care. The Borough Council has responsibility for Housing.
8. The subject of this complaint is the County Council. I refer to it as the Council.

What happened

9. Miss X is a tenant of the Borough Council. Miss Y and Miss X’s other children live with her.
10. Miss Y is Disabled. She uses a wheelchair and needs help from Miss X to carry out some activities of daily life.
11. Following a previous complaint to the Ombudsman, the Council completed a new assessment of Miss Y’s needs in May 2022. That assessment said the current property was not suitable and could not be adapted to meet Miss Y’s needs. It recommended the Borough Council rehouse the family.
12. An Occupational Therapist (OT) completed the assessment, which set out what Miss Y needed for a property to be suitable. This included:
• Wheelchair accessible external access to the property
• Space to park her motability vehicle
• Hallways and doors wide enough for her wheelchair
• Enough space in the rooms for her to manoeuvre her wheelchair
• A bedroom with enough space for her specialist bed and other equipment and room to get around in her wheelchair
• A kitchen adapted for, or adaptable to, a wheelchair user
• A wet room with special equipment
• Space for a mobile hoist or future installation of a ceiling track hoist
• Three additional bedrooms for the rest of the family
13. One of the recommendations says that all the rooms Miss Y needs to access should be on the ground floor and level access throughout. It then says: “annexe style adaptation to support [Miss Y] with mobility, transfers, independence, dignity, and mental and physical wellbeing”.
14. The Borough Council agreed the family needed to move and included them on its housing register in June. The OT from the Council would view any prospective properties to confirm if they were suitable for, or could be adapted to meet, Miss Y’s needs.
15. In November, the Borough Council asked the OT to visit a property it thought might be suitable. Miss X told the Borough Council that it would not be suitable because it was a mid-terrace property. She said this meant the property could not accommodate the annexe accommodation recommended by the OT.
16. In December, the OT emailed the Borough Council to set out what would be required from an annexe for Miss Y. This included her own front door and a separate living room as well as bedroom and bathroom.
17. In January 2023, the Borough Council met with the OT to discuss the referral. The minutes of this meeting record that the purpose of the meeting was to clarify what was “essential” to meet Miss Y’s needs and what was “ideal”. This was to avoid a situation where no property available to the Borough Council would be suitable.
18. The minutes of this meeting show the OT agreed that an annexe was not necessary to meet Miss Y’s needs. This was because any property would have a fully accessible ground floor, including the living room and kitchen, which would improve Miss Y’s quality of life and increase her independence in the home.

Analysis

19. Miss X says the OT should not have amended the recommendations to fit the Borough Council’s assessment of what was realistic and feasible. Miss X says the annexe is necessary for Miss Y to develop her independence and protect her dignity.
20. It is not entirely clear whether the original assessment in May 2022 said an annexe was necessary for a property to be suitable. It includes reference to “annexe style adaptation” but this is in relation to ensuring the entire ground floor is level access and wheelchair accessible. It may, therefore, have been intended as a description rather than a requirement.
21. The OT’s email in December, however, clearly describes a separate annexe for Miss Y in which she could live semi-independently with support from Miss X. It is understandable, therefore, that Miss X considers the OT to have assessed Miss Y as needing an annexe to meet her needs.
22. The role of the Council is to assess Miss Y’s needs and recommend how these needs can be met. The Council did not alter its assessment of Miss Y’s needs.
23. We expect County and Borough councils to work together to meet the care, support, and housing needs of residents. Therefore, it was not fault for the Council to meet with the Borough Council and amend the recommendations to reflect the practical restrictions of housing in the area.
24. The purpose of the proposed annexe is to increase Miss Y’s independence, dignity, and mental and physical wellbeing. It may be that the Borough Council will offer a property which enables Miss Y to meet these needs. However, we would expect the Council to reassess Miss Y once the family moves to consider if there remain unmet care and support needs.

Back to top

Final decision

25. I have completed my investigation. There is no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman