Summary: The Council was at fault for the way it responded to Ms X’s concerns about works carried out under a Disabled Facilities Grant. This caused Ms X to have to use a bathroom which was not suitable for her. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and make a payment for the distress caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the way the Council handled works to convert her bathroom into a wet room through a disabled facilities grant. She says the Council did not properly respond to her reports about the quality of the work.

Back to top

What I have investigated

2. I have investigated Ms X’s complaint about how the Council responded to Ms X concerns about the initial works carried out under a Disabled Facilities Grant. I have set out at the end of this statement matters I have not investigated. I sent a draft of this decision to Ms X and the Council for comments.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))
5. 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

6. As part of this investigation I considered the complaint made by Ms X and the Council’s response. I discussed the complaint with Ms X over the telephone. I considered the information provide by Ms X. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the response received.

Back to top

What I found

7. Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG) are provided under the terms of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. Council’s have a statutory duty to provide grant aid to disabled people for certain adaptations. Before approving a grant a council must be satisfied the work is necessary and suitable to meet the disabled person’s needs and also reasonable and practicable.

What happened

8. In March 2019 the Council’s Occupational Therapist (OT) assessed Ms X’s needs. The OT decided Ms X required a level access shower and a curved stairlift in the property where she lived.
9. In April 2019 Ms X completed an application for a DFG. The Council sent a surveyor to her property to measure up the bathroom. In July 2019 the Council completed a schedule of works. The Council sent this to the OT who assessed Ms X and they agreed with the schedule. The Council also sent the schedule to several contractors. One contractor said they could not carry out the work. The second contractor visited Ms X’s property in September 2019. Following the visit the Council amended the schedule of works at the request of Ms X. This was agreed by the OT.
10. On 1 October 2019 the contractor started works to convert Ms X’s bathroom into a wet room. The contractor completed the works on 18 October 2019. The Council said Ms X signed off these works with the Council’s grant surveyor present. Ms X disputed this and said she was not in the country at the time.
11. In December 2019, Ms X complained to the Council about the following concerns with the DFG works:
• The tiles installed in her shower did not match and there were holes and chips in the tiles.
• The shower did not drain properly, and caused water to pool in the wet room.
• The shower doors caused water to leak and touch the towel rail when opened.
• The taps in the wash hand basin were incorrect and Ms X found it difficult to turn them.
• The shower curtain rail was too high for Ms X or her cleaner to reach.
12. The Council responded to Ms X’s concerns on 30 December 2019. The Council said:
• It felt the works to Ms X’s wet room were correct and not poor quality.
• The contractor installed Ms X’s shower curtain rack at the correct height.
• Ms X asked it to retain her green tiles. The Council said it told Ms X there would be a possibility of holes in the tiles which needed filling as the old shower screens were attached to the wall through the green tiles.
• The water flow to the basin taps was acceptable.
• The shower was fully accessible, and the shower doors were in the correct place.
13. In September 2020 Ms X raised concerns about her wet room with the Council again. This included the issues about her shower curtain, shower drainage, wash basin taps and shower doors.
14. The Council provided a complaint response to Ms X on 9 October 2020. The Council said it had not received further correspondence from Ms X since December 2019 so considered the matter closed. The Council also responded to Ms X on each point she raised about the condition of her wet room and decided there was no need for further work.
15. Ms X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response, so the Council moved her complaint to stage two of its process.
16. The Council provided Ms X with its stage two response on 10 November 2020. The Council said it was satisfied its earlier response in October 2020 addressed Ms X’s complaint. However it did not signpost Ms X to the Ombudsman should she remain dissatisfied.
17. Ms X contacted the Council again in January 2021 about the problems with her wet room. Ms X spoke to the Head of Health & Wellbeing at the Council about the concerns with her wet room.
18. On 12 March 2021 the Council provided Ms X with a further response. The Council agreed to open a new case and have an OT carry out an assessment.
19. An OT visited Ms X on 16 March 2021 and recommended the Council:
• Assess the drainage of the shower by getting a plumber as the OT noticed pools of water on the floor.
• Replace the shower bi-fold doors as water was escaping at the bottom of them.
• Lower the shower curtain as Ms X cannot reach it.
• Replace the basin sink taps with leaver taps as Ms X found turning these on difficult.
• Consider the cosmetic concerns Ms X raised in relation to the tiles and remedy them as much as is reasonable.
20. Following the OT’s assessment the Council agreed to carry out the OT’s recommendations through a DFG. The Council also agreed the DFG would also include new wall tiling, a new drain cover and any associated works to the shower tray.

Analysis

21. The Council was at fault for the way it responded to Ms X’s concerns about her wet room. After the works were completed Ms X told the Council about issues with the wet room. These included the shower rail height and issues with the taps.
22. While the Council responded to Ms X’s concerns at the end of December 2019, it did not make any attempt to address these. When Ms X contacted the Council later in 2020, and after considering the matter through its complaints process, the Council decided to carry out a further OT assessment. This OT assessment supported Ms X’s concerns about the height of the shower rail, her concern with the basin taps and the issues with the shower door. The OT assessment recommended lowering the shower curtain, installing lever taps and installing new shower doors. The Council has agreed to carry out these works.
23. Had the Council assessed Ms X at the time she initially raised concerns with her wet room, it may well have identified these issues sooner. As a result Ms X has had to wait longer for some of the concerns she raised about her wet room to be resolved.
24. There was also fault with the Council’s complaint handling. The Council operates a two stage complaints procedure. Its stage two response to Ms X does not signpost her to the Ombudsman. I accept Ms X was able to complain to the Ombudsman, but she may have done so sooner, in November 2020, should she have been signposted by the Council in its stage two complaint response.

Back to top

Agreed action

25. Within one month of my final decision the Council has agreed to carry out the following and provide evidence to the Ombudsman it has done so:
• Apologise to Ms X for the faults identified.
• Pay Ms X £300 to recognise the distress, time and trouble she experienced in pursuing this with the Council. In coming to this figure I have considered the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies.
• Remind staff to ensure all final complaint letters signpost people to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I have completed my investigation on the basis the Council was at fault. This caused Ms X injustice. The Council has agreed to the above actions to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman