Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (21 003 890)

Category : Adult care services > Disabled facilities grants

Decision : Not upheld

Decision date : 29 Jul 2021

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr X’s complaint about how the Council was dealing with adaptions to his home has been resolved. The complaint will be discontinued.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains about the way the Council is dealing with adaptations to his home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)
  2. 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

  1. I considered the information submitted by Mr X, and the Council’s response.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Mr X had an external ramp fitted in 2002 under a Disabled facilities Grant; it met the required building regulations at the time.
  2. In 2021 the Council completed a further assessment for a ceiling hoist. During assessment the occupational therapist noted the external ramp fitted previously was no longer safe.
  3. The Council told Mr X he could only have the ceiling hoist if he also agrees to a step-lift.
  4. Mr X does not want a step-lift because if it breaks down he will be unable to leave the house. He wants a guaranteed access point so he can maintain independence.
  5. Mr X contacted the Ombudsman on 29 July 2021 to say the matter has been resolved and he no longer wishes to pursue his complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. The matters Mr X complained about have been resolved. The investigation will be discontinued.
  2. It is on this basis; the complaint will be closed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page