Summary: Ms C complains about the failure of the Council to carry out adaptations properly. The Council is at fault for failing to provide a schedule of works, delayed in starting work and an officer making an unannounced visit. The Council has made a concerted effort to find the cause of an ongoing bad odour, I cannot say on balance, its contractors caused the problem. To remedy the faults identified the Council has agreed to apologise to Ms C and her mother and pay £500 for their time, trouble, and avoidable distress.

The complaint

1. The complainant who I call Ms C complains in her own right and on behalf of her mother who I call Mrs D. Ms C complains the Council delayed in progressing a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) and commissioning contractors. Ms C says the Council failed to keep them updated about building work, completed unsatisfactory building work, failed to take remedial action, and respond to the complaint properly.
2. Because of the Council’s failures the complainants say they were left in unsanitary conditions and unable to use a toilet for ten days. They say contractors ruined their Christmas after causing a leak. The complainants say the Council’s actions caused them stress, anxiety, time, and trouble in making the complaint. They say the disrepair affected their mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), as amended)
5. 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

6. I spoke with Ms C and considered information she provided. I asked the Council for written information and explanations about what had happened. I considered:-
• an independent defect inspection report;
• two different drainage inspection reports;
• a plumbing inspection report;
• Stage 2 investigation report.
7. Ms C and the Council 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

Background information

8. Ms C lives with Mrs D. Mrs D has mobility difficulties and following a referral in December 2020, the Council agreed to convert the bathroom into a wet room.

What should have happened

9. Disabled Facilities Grants are provided under the terms of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. Councils have a statutory duty to give grants to disabled people for certain adaptations. Before approving a grant, a council must be satisfied the work is necessary, meets the disabled person’s needs, and is reasonable and practicable.

What happened

10. Following issues with the original Council commissioned contractor, the Council contacted a third party for a quote, in July 2021. I will refer to the third party as X. Ms C complained to the Council as X visited the property to complete a survey early. She was also unaware the Council had changed contractor. The Council responded providing an explanation and apologised for their early arrival. In response to a draft of this decision the Council says the contractors arrived 30 minutes early and Ms C allowed them access.
11. Following requests for updates by Ms C the Council agreed a start date in September. This was nine months after the Occupational Therapist made a referral to the Equipment and Adaptations team for Mrs D’s wet room conversion.
12. An email from the Council dated 7 September said, “There will be very limited times during the works when the toilet is not accessible. This will always be kept to a minimum but again is unavoidable. The operatives on site will always accommodate your mum’s needs to access the toilet wherever possible. If this is not acceptable to you then the only alternatives I can suggest are either moving out of the property during the works, or having a commode available for your mum to use on the rare occasions that the toilet is not available for use.”
13. Ms C replied on the same day, “if you could provide a commode on Friday 17th for her needs that she could use in her bedroom.” Ms C says the Council inappropriately suggested respite as an option. The Council held a pre-works meeting on 15 September and began work on 20 September.
14. Ms C says that she could not use the toilet for ten days and had to at times use the garden. Ms C says they could not flush the toilet and a Council suggestion that she share the commode with her mother was inappropriate. The Council says workers did not leave the toilet unusable overnight and offered to leave the bathroom so Mrs D or Ms C could use the toilet if needed during the day. The Council also says Ms C made no complaint at the time and only raised the issue when discussing her complaints with the independent complaints officer.
15. On 1 October Ms C complained to X about an odour coming from the bathroom. Throughout October X sent several plumbers to find the cause of the smell. An officer made an unannounced visit to Ms C’s house on 7 October. Ms C complained about the unannounced visit. She says the officer was manipulative and trying to prevent her from complaining. Ms C asked that he not visit again, and a female officer come instead. The Council says the officer was in the area and visited to review the progress of the works.
16. In November Ms C continued to complain about the smell. There were several visits and attempts to find the source of the smell. This included visits from the Housing Standards and Adaptations Team. Ms C says throughout the period of the complaint roughly 30 people visited the property.
17. On 26 November a third party drainage company completed a drainage survey and found a leak in the toilet connection. Contractors secured the toilet, applying bleach to the concrete and relayed the floor. In response to a draft of this statement the Council says the toilet connection was checked several times by different contractors. It therefore considers the leak occurred after these checks and only present for a few days.
18. Ms C says there was a delay in the Council carrying out the recommendations. She also says the Council did not complete extra work included in the report about a cracked drainpipe outside the toilet.
19. The smell continued into December and as a result Ms C and Mrs D cancelled their Christmas plans. Ms C complained about the boiler leaking on Christmas eve. The Council completed further work in December. This included draining and refilling the radiators and servicing the boiler. This was not part of the adaptation work but completed as a gesture of goodwill by the Council. The Council says Ms C told the engineer on 24 December there was an existing fault and therefore the Council was not responsible for the leak.
20. On 26 December Ms C complained there was a leak from the just serviced boiler. X completed repairs but Ms C says because of delays in getting parts remained incomplete until 30/31 December. Ms C says following the repairs there was still a strong smell.
21. On 30 December a second independent drainage company commissioned by the Council surveyed using CCTV to see if it could find the source of the smell. It found cracks in the underground pipes but this was not related to the smell.
22. On 11 January 2022 the Council responded to Ms C’s first stage complaint and agreed to appoint an independent building surveyor to identify the cause of the smell. An independent surveyor completed an assessment on 28 January 2022. It said the heating system caused the smell. It advised to check for corrosion and to contact the boiler manufacturer for advice on cleaning the system.
23. In response to a draft of this statement Ms C says the Council did not tell her of corrosion in radiators. Ms C says the contractor from Christmas eve told her the radiator fitted in the wet room was the cause of the smell as it had been left outside for a long period of time before installation. Ms C says the contractor flushed the system out on Christmas eve and there was no need to recheck the radiator system in January.
24. In February 2022 a plumbing service completed an inspection and said there was no fault in the heating. The cause of the smell was from the drainage.
25. The Stage 2 investigation report found fault in the Council’s:
• lack of communication and updating Ms C about the progress and start of the works;
• lack of a schedule of works;
• lack of planning for how Ms C and Mrs D would access a toilet while it completed the works;
• an officer calling Ms C unannounced.
26. The investigating officer decided that although there was a foul smell the adaptation work was not the cause of the smell. It was the drainage causing the smell. The Council had done more than its obligations to investigate the source of the smell and there was nothing more it could do. The Council agreed to carry out several actions which included:
• there is a handover of adaptation cases so managers are aware of priority cases;
• people receiving bathroom adaptations will receive a programme of works detailing the date, nature of work and people who will visit the home;
• introduction of a process so officers can discuss potential issues from restricted access to bathrooms and if necessary liaise with occupational therapy and social care staff to ensure needs are met;
• a reminder to staff in the Housing Standards and Adaptations Team to prearrange appointments when visiting homes.
27. The Council wrote to Ms C and Mrs D apologising for the faults found and the actions it would take.

Was there fault causing injustice?

28. I have considered the independent Stage 2 report and agree with the outcome and recommendations set out in the report.
29. There is a recurring foul odour at Ms C’s property which started after the Council’s contractors had completed the works. The Council tried its best to find the cause of the smell to no avail. It instructed a wide range of independent contractors who had several different views on the cause of the smell. None of these causes related to the work completed by the Council. I am therefore unable to say on balance the commissioned adaptation caused the foul smell.
30. I am also unable to say the leak caused after the servicing of the boiler would not have occurred had X not carried out repairs.
31. There was however fault in some of the process completed by the Council detailed at paragraph 25 above. In addition the Council found a defect in the toilet connection to the drain. It is more likely than not this occurred after X completed the works and lasted for not more than a few days. This was however part of the adaptation work and therefore I consider the Council is at fault for failing to properly connect the toilet which resulted in time and trouble for Ms C and Mrs D.
32. I welcome the procedural changes the Council has made but do not consider they go far enough to remedy Ms C and Mrs D’s personal injustice. Given the information provided I accept it would have been uncomfortable using the bathroom for ten days. While this may be usual the Council should have given Ms C and Mrs D fair warning which would have allowed them to make other arrangements. I consider although uncomfortable Ms C did have alternatives other than to use the garden such as other temporary toilet facilities (e.g. a portaloo). Both Ms C and Mrs D did however have avoidable time, trouble, and distress.

Back to top

Agreed actions

33. I consider there was fault in the actions of the Council which caused Ms C and Mrs D avoidable time, trouble, and distress. The Council has agreed to take the following actions to remedy the complaint:-
1. apologise to Ms C and Mrs D for the faults identified in this statement;
2. pay Ms C and Mrs D £250 each for their avoidable time, trouble, and distress;
3. provide evidence the Council has completed the agreed actions. These include:-
1. there is now a handover of adaptation cases so managers are aware of priority cases;
2. people receiving bathroom adaptations will receive a program of works detailing the date, nature of work and people who will attend the home;
3. the Council has introduced a process so officers can discuss issues which may occur from restricted access to the bathroom and if necessary, liaise with occupational therapy and social care staff to ensure the needs are met;
4. a reminder to staff in the Housing Standards and Adaptations Team to prearrange appointments when wanting to visit homes.
34. The Council should complete (a) to (b) within one month of the final decision and c(1) to c(4) within three months of the final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I have found fault causing injustice and consider the agreed actions are suitable to remedy the complaint. I have now completed my investigation and closed the complaint on this basis.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman