Summary: There is no fault by Wakefield City Council in relation to this complaint about its handling of a Disabled Facilities Grant

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms X, complains that the Council recommended a builder to complete works under a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) and that the works completed have been of poor quality and some of them, dangerous. Specifically, she complains that the Council has refused to:
1. take responsibility for the poor quality of building work undertaken;
2. consider re-housing her during a period that she was left without gas or hot water; and
3. signed off the work even though it is of poor quality.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’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 discussed the complaint with Ms X and considered the written information she provided on it. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered all the information before reaching a draft decision on the complaint.
5. I gave the Council and Ms X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and took account of their comments before reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. A Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) is awarded by the housing authority to make adaptations to the home which are ‘necessary and appropriate’ to meet the disabled occupant’s needs, where it is ‘reasonable and practicable’ to carry out such adaptations.
7. A DFG to meet the needs of a disabled child is not means-tested but it is capped at £30,000.
8. Whilst the Council agrees to pay the DFG it is the applicant who engages the building contractor to do the work and the contract to complete the building work is therefore between the applicant and the contractor. The Council may provide a list of contractors from whom the applicant may wish to choose but they are free to appoint a different builder/contractor if they choose. The Council has no legal responsibility for the standard of the work even if it the builder is on its list of contractors.

Background

9. Ms X’s teenage son has significant disabilities which mean his is incontinent and has mobility problems. He uses a wheelchair outside. He attends a special needs school and receives regular respite care from the Council.
10. In 2017 Ms X asked the Council to consider providing a DFG so that she could build a downstairs bedroom and wet room to meet her son’s needs. The Council approved a DFG of £30,000 in January 2018. The Council says its Senior Disability Projects Officer visited the property in July 2018 and the works listed in the DFG were largely completed with only small snagging items outstanding.

What happened

11. The Council says it provides DFG applicants with a list of approved contractors and that the applicant can use a contractor from this list if they wish or chose someone else. The Council confirms that the contract is between the applicant and whichever builder they engage and does not involve the Council. Ms X alleges that a council officer told her who the contractor completing her building work would be and introduced her to this builder. She therefore does not consider that the contractor was employed by her but by the Council. The Council says that “Initially the DFG Officer, Mr Y, was allocated the case. But he has not been at work since October 2018.
12. The Council says that due to the nature of Mr Y’s absence it has been inappropriate to question him regarding the allegations and anything that had occurred during his involvement with this DFG.
13. The Council points out however that it holds a copy of the discussion sheet used during the initial inspection made by Mr Y. This is a form in which tick boxes are completed confirming that Ms X will choose her own contractor from the list supplied and that the officer discussed architectural costs with her. It is signed by Ms X.
14. Ms X alleges that Mr Y brought the contractor to this meeting and introduced the builder to her as the person who would be completing the work under her DFG. In relation to this the Council says “To the knowledge of Wakefield Council only Ms X and Mr Y attended the meeting however the Council is unable to comment further as to whether Mr Y arrived on site with the builder as alleged”.
15. The Council confirms that its building control department has not issued a building regulations completion certificate for the work and says the reason for this is that the work is not yet completed to the satisfaction of the building control team.
16. In September 2018 Ms X submitted a complaint to the Council about the quality of the work completed. In her complaint she detailed her unhappiness with the quality of the gas meter fitting which she said the contractor did not have authority to complete and said this meant her house insurance was invalidated. She also complained about the way in which the contract was arranged and handled by Mr Y and about the final invoice submitted by the contractor.
17. The Council made an immediate referral to the Gas Safe service for investigation of the safety of a gas meter that Ms X believed had been incorrectly installed by the contractor. On confirmation from Ms X that she wanted the matter considered under the Council’s formal complaints process it began its investigation into the other parts of the complaint. However, as Mr Y was away from work by that time the Council informed Ms X that it would not be possible to interview him. The query about the final invoice seemed to stem from Ms X telling the Council that she and her partner had completed some of the work themselves and had also supplied some of the materials and so said the costs associated with these should not be included in the contractor’s invoice. The Council asked for details of the works and materials she had supplied and completed.
18. In November 2018 building control stated it would not issue a completion certificate for the works until remedial work was completed to floor and roof insulation, drainage, some plasterboard and gas completion certificate had been issued.
19. The Council confirms it paid for and ensured the gas meter work was properly completed.
20. The Council confirms that Ms X instructed a plumber to put right the plumbing work that needed remedial action and that the plumber was paid from the agreed DFG.
21. The Council confirms it has not released any of the DFG for payment of the original contractor and so around £29,000 is still being held by the Council and will not be issued until Building Control are satisfied and have issued their completion certificate. The Council says it has released around £1000 to Ms X for materials she bought and some works she complete herself. The Council says “Wakefield Council did not agree to pay for the works to be put right. It was agreed with Ms X that all grant monies would be paid directly to her new contractors as each element was rectified. Once Building Control have certified it is completed all outstanding balance of the grant will be paid to Ms X who can then decide what, if anything, she pays to …” (the original contractor).
22. The Council says that it was unaware that Ms X had re-engaged the original contractors to put right the insulation work that was not completed properly until November 2018 and says it has recently learned that she has now re-engaged them again to complete the outstanding plastering work but that this is at an impasse as Ms X wants them to complete a larger job than that required by the Building Control. The outstanding items of work still remaining before Building Control will sign off the work include provision of sanitary ware to level access shower, fixing of plasterboards and skirting.
23. The Council confirms that when the illegal gas work/meter installation was formally noted by Gas Safe in September 2018, the building contractor was removed from the Approved Contractors list pending the outcome of the Health and Safety Executive investigation.
24. The Council says it became aware of issues regarding hot water and heating on 1 October 2018 when Ms X called the Council to report this. The Council confirms that Ms X asked the Council to fund hotel or some other alternative accommodation whilst she was without hot water and heating. The Council says that a previous DFG had been provided for the installation of a “Safe Space sleeping system” for Ms X’s son and this would not be suitable for hotel or similar accommodation. It says Ms X was advised to speak to her son’s social worker for advice.
25. The social worker confirms Ms X told him in September 2018 that she thought the work completed was unsafe and hadn’t been fully completed and that she was speaking to the Aids & Adaptations department about this. In October 2018 the social worker says he was told the gas “had been condemned” and there was no hot water or heating and that Ms X was staying at her mother’s home. The social worker says Ms X told him she had made a request to Aids & Adaptations on access to hot water and heating the family home and this was outstanding. The social worker says Ms X made no request of him for alternative accommodation and that she had told him she was using her mother’s for baths and hot water. It seems the social worker had no concerns about the arrangements Ms X had made and he was satisfied she was able to meet her son’s needs. He further says she made no request for help form him and he was not contacted directly by the Aids and Adaptations team for this either. The social worker confirms that his involvement with the family is around arranging respite care for Ms X’s son.
26. In my telephone conversation with Ms X at the beginning of the investigation, she told me that she was unable to stay with her mother during the period she was without heating and hot water because her father was unwell. She said to me that she therefore remained at home managing without heating and hot water until the work to the gas meter was completed. I have seen no evidence that Ms X told the Council this was the situation at the time and it seems the social worker understood the family was staying with Ms X’s mother.
27. Ms X confirms the work is still not completed and says this means she continues to have problems with her son. She says he still sleeps upstairs and she struggles to get him upstairs now as he a teenager and around six feet tall. The current bathroom facilities are also unsuitable for him and her caring for him.

Ms X’s complaint to the Council

28. Ms X complained at the end of August 2018. The stage 2 response sent to Ms X in December 2018 makes the following points:
• No concerns about the quality of the work were raised until the invoice was raised by the contractor and the amount was higher than the £30,000 DFG limit;
• the Council was not responsible for supervising the work, or making sure it was done to the proper standard. The agreement for this is between the contractor and Ms X;
• A Disabled Facilities Grant is an agreement between the applicant (Ms X) and the Council. It is not a contract between the Council and the builder;
• Ms X signed an application form in February 2018 to confirm she had chosen a contractor from the Approved Contractor list;
• the gas meter in Ms X’s home was re-located in an unsafe and illegal way. The Council paid for the meter to be safely installed, and that the incident was reported to the proper authorities for further investigation; and
• The Council’s Adaptations Delivery Manager agreed that Ms X could employ a different builder to put right the outstanding work, and the Council would, as a gesture of good will, reimburse Ms X on production of accounts and certificates.

Was the Council at fault and did any fault cause injustice?

29. Ms X believes the Council should take responsibility for the poor quality of the work undertaken by the builder/contractor. I have seen no evidence that the Council appointed the contractor as Ms X alleges. The Council insists this is not its usual procedure and that it provides a list of approved contractors which DFG recipinets are free to use or not. The officer that Ms X alleges appointed the contractor has been off work sick for a very long time and appears to be unavailable for interview. None of the written records appear to confirm what Ms X alleges and the Council also says its records do not confirm that the contractor attended the first meeting as she alleges. It is the case that Ms X signed a document to confirm that she would choose her own contractor from the list supplied. In the absence of evidence that the officer appointed the contractor, and the apparent impossibility of obtaining such evidence, I do not believe there are grounds for me to reach a finding of fault by the Council on this part of the complaint and the evidence that is available confirms that Ms X agreed she would choose a contractor from the Council’s list. As the contract for the completion of the building work is between Ms X and the builder she could consider seeking legal advice if she believes the builder has failed to comply with the contract.
30. The Council’s Aids and Adaptations team did not consider that rehousing Ms X and her family was an option during the period she was without hot water and heating which Ms X says was around a month. It says the specific nature of the adaptations already in place for her son could not be replicated in temporary accommodation and so advised her to speak to her social worker about this further. The social worker says that Ms X did not ask him for assistance with accommodation and he understood that Ms X was staying with her mother during the period she was without hot water and heating. I have not seen any specific written request from Ms X to the Council asking for re-housing or stating that she was living in the house and not with her mother. Ms X sent me a screenshot of a text correspondence with a Council officer in which she refers to having asked another officer in the Aids and Adaptations team if there was anything she could do to help with not having any gas supply but there is no specific request for re-housing and it seems the social worker understood that Ms X had sorted herself out with alternative accommodation and no evidence of Ms X following up any failure to help her with this. I do not therefore have grounds to conclude there is evidence of fault in respect of this part of Ms X’s complaint.
31. The Council says its Building Control team has not yet signed off the work as there are still outstanding areas of work which need to be completed or re-done. The vast majority of the DFG has consequently not yet been released.

Back to top

Final decision

32. There is no fault by the Council in its handling of Ms X’s Disabled Facilities Grant.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman