Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s failure to carry our adaptations properly at her property and about how she has been treated throughout the process. The Ombudsman does not find fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains about the Council’s failure to carry out adaptations properly at her property and about how she has been treated throughout the process. Mrs X said because of this, her and her family remained living in unsuitable accommodation. She said this has caused her and her family significant stress.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

2. I have investigated whether the Council failed to carry out adaptations properly at Mrs X’s property and how she was treated throughout the process. I have not investigated whether Mrs X remained living in unsuitable accommodation and what happened after Mrs X moved to a new property. This is because the Council is not responsible for this issue. This is the responsibility of the landlord, which the law states I cannot investigate.

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. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. We cannot investigate a complaint where the body complained about is not responsible for the issue being raised. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(1), 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 Mrs X about her complaint. I considered all the information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
7. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened?

8. Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG) 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.
9. The Council will need to check that the proposed works are:
• necessary and appropriate to meet the disabled person’s needs.
• reasonable and practicable depending on the age and condition of the property.

What did happen?

10. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
11. In May 2021 the Council sent a letter to Mrs X advising her of how to make a DFG application. It said in submitting a DFG application, Mrs X would be responsible for:
• Making a valid application
• Obtaining details quotations for the work and any necessary planning or building regulations approvals etc. based upon the Occupational Therapists (OT) recommendations.
• Managing the building contract(s) with her chosen contractors.
• Making sure that the contractors carry out the right works i.e., they must meet the OT requirements in full.
• Resolving disputes between her and the contractor.
12. In September 2021, a mining report was completed on Mrs X’s property. It said the main building was within an area likely to be affected if coal mining subsidence was to occur because of ground movement. But it noted the statistical risk of the main building being damaged by subsidence was small and building control approved this report.
13. The Council sent Mrs X’s husband, Mr X a letter in April 2022 which stated he had been approved for a DFG for adaptations to be completed at the property where he was a social housing tenant. The letter stated Mr X could contact his contractor to arrange for them to carry out the adaptations. It also advised him to arrange an agreement with his contractor regarding the following:
• A start date of the works
• A completion date for the works
• The terms of the payment of the contractor
14. After the works began at the property, the Council were advised in May 2022 by Mrs X’s architect that building control had visited the property. It was stated that there was now a requirement to appoint an engineer to design the foundations.
15. In the following month, the Council’s emails noted there were four mineshafts located close to Mrs X’s property. It was noted that as the area would be affected by subsidence, the stability of the proposed extension at the property could not be guaranteed.
16. In June 2022, Mrs X asked the Council for an update. She said her front drive was a hazard and said the work at her property had stopped. She said she had been told a more in depth mine report was required.
17. In the same month, Mrs X told the Council her family was now more worse off than before the works began. She said she wanted help with how to move forward. She said she had no bathroom, her husband was having to use a commode and stated her daughter needed her own room.
18. The Council told Mrs X in June 2022 that she would need to contact her landlord to enquire about moving to a property that was either already adapted or to one that could be reasonably adapted. It confirmed to Mrs X that the works could not proceed at her current property. It also stated the adaptation project was for her to manage and said it was not the responsibility of the Council. It said Mrs X’s builder and architect should have kept her informed.
19. In the same month, Mrs X’s architect advised her that if building control had highlighted the mining issues at the very start when plans were submitted, the job was likely to have been cancelled.
20. In September 2022, Mrs X asked the Council if there were other adaptations that could be done to her current property, including a smaller extension.
21. The Council advised Mrs X, another extension even if small could still be impacted the same way. It advised Mrs X to speak to her landlord if she wished to pursue any investigatory works, as it said this would need to be either funded by Mrs X or her landlord. This was because the Council did not consider this option would lead to any change in the overall position.
22. Mrs X complained to the Council in November 2022 and said the Council’s communication had been poor. She said because of funding, she had faced issues finding a builder. She said the Council officer and architect recommended a builder who could complete the works within the budget. She said since the work had stopped, her and her family had been living in unsuitable accommodation.
23. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint in the same month. It said officers have specific (limited) statutory duties relating to the DFG process which it said was to: enable an applicant to make a DFG application, consideration of a DFG application and payment for completed works. It said it found no evidence the Council frustrated this process. But it said it offered advice and guidance on a number of occasions, which it said was offered on a discretionary basis. It said the Council was not responsible for project managing the works.
24. Mrs X’s landlord found her a new property in February 2023 which Mrs X has applied to have adapted under a DFG, which the Council are considering.
25. Mrs X said she has had further issues at the new property. She said the garden had been ripped out and was not level, there was no proper access to the garden and stated there are steps at the front of the property.

Analysis

26. The letter sent to Mrs X in May 2021 advised her of what she would be responsible for when applying for a DFG. This is noted in paragraph 12. Another letter sent in April 2022, advised Mr X to contact his contractor. As stated in paragraph 14, the Council advised Mr X to arrange an agreement with his contractor. Therefore, it was not for the Council to manage the works being completed at the property and from the evidence seen, I am satisfied that the Council made this clear to Mr and Mrs X from the beginning of the application.
27. A mining report was approved by building control in 2021. But it became clear in June, after work had started, that it could not continue due to the property being near four mineshafts. Whilst I understand this had a significant impact on Mrs X and her family, the Ombudsman’s role is to review councils adherence to procedure in making decisions. Where a council has followed the correct process, considered all relevant information, and given clear and cogent reasons for its decision, we generally cannot criticise it. In this case, the Council’s role was to: enable an applicant to make the DFG application, consideration of the DFG application and consider payment for completed works. There is no evidence to suggest the Council did not adhere to this. There was no fault in the process followed by the Council.
28. Mrs X asked the Council for an update in June 2022. The Council advised her to speak to her landlord about moving to a different property and confirmed the works could not proceed at her current property. As Mrs X’s landlord are a separate legal entity from the Council, the Council is not responsible for arranging for Mrs X to move to a different property. That is the landlord’s role. There is no fault in the Council’s actions. It correctly advised Mrs X to speak with her landlord.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I have completed my investigation on the basis there was no fault in the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman