Disabled facilities grants


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Forest of Dean District Council (16 003 966)

    Statement Not upheld Disabled facilities grants 20-Nov-2017

    Summary: The Council was not at fault in refusing Mr X a disabled facilities grant.

  • London Borough of Barnet (17 010 633)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled facilities grants 30-Oct-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss A's complaint about grant funded works. We could not now investigate effectively a complaint about what happened in 2006.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (17 010 496)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled facilities grants 27-Oct-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Ms B's complaint about the kitchen and bathroom adaptations to her home. That is because the service she is complaining about is the Council's management of its social housing.

  • Telford & Wrekin Council (17 002 669)

    Statement Not upheld Disabled facilities grants 20-Oct-2017

    Summary: It is not fault that the Council declined to meet the cost of a stair lift which Mr and Mrs X had installed. There was no fault in how the Council applied the Disabled Facilities Grant process to Mr and Mrs X's application, which determined they did not qualify for a grant.

  • Leeds City Council (17 003 969)

    Statement Not upheld Disabled facilities grants 10-Oct-2017

    Summary: Mr and Mrs A complain there was fault by the Council in the way it dealt with their request for adaptations to their kitchen to meet Mrs A's needs. There is no evidence of fault by the Council and as it has offered a further assessment by an occupational therapist there are no grounds which warrant further investigation of the complaint by the Ombudsman.

  • Coventry City Council (17 008 581)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled facilities grants 26-Sep-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr A's complaint about the way the Council conducted an assessment of his need for a Disabled Facilities Grant. This is because it is unlikely he could add to the Council's response or make a different finding of the kind Mr A wants even if he investigated.

  • Manchester City Council (17 004 999)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled facilities grants 21-Sep-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B's late complaint about poor quality shower installation work because he could not now investigate it effectively.

  • Northumberland Council (17 001 078)

    Statement Upheld Disabled facilities grants 20-Sep-2017

    Summary: Mr P complains about a new door fitted as part of Disabled Facilities Grant works. He says the door is not as expected. The Council has already acknowledged fault in its handling of the case and has provided a reasonable remedy. The Ombudsman has not found any evidence of additional fault. She has upheld the complaint and completed the investigation.

  • Ashford Borough Council (16 013 550)

    Statement Not upheld Disabled facilities grants 20-Sep-2017

    Summary: There was no fault in the Council's actions in relation to works undertaken on Mr B's home under a Disabled Facilities Grant. The actions of the Home Improvement Agency and the Contractors are not within the Ombudsman's remit.

  • Kent County Council (17 007 739)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled facilities grants 19-Sep-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs A's complaint about the Council's refusal to transfer her daughter's Ordinary Residence. This is because it is unlikely he will find enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an investigation.

;