Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the standard of adaptations by the Council’s contractor. The Council offered suitable options to remedy the issues that arose. I am satisfied with the action it proposed to take, and it is not responsible for remaining injustice.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the quality of works completed by the Council’s contractor for a wet room for her mother (Mrs Y) under a disabled facilities grant. She says she went to the inconvenience of reporting several issues with the work and chasing the Council for a response to her complaint. She says she and Mrs Y had no usable bathroom for four months in 2022, and ultimately they paid around £7,500 themselves to complete the works to a suitable standard.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council agreed to pay a disabled facilities grant to adapt Mrs Y’s bathroom into a wet room. The work began in mid-2022. Miss X soon began raising concerns about the quality of the work. The Council accepted some errors were made and arranged for those issues to be resolved swiftly. Some issues related to Miss X’s and Mrs Y’s choice of tiles. Other issues remained unresolved.
6. The Council discussed several options with Miss X to arrange for the works to be continued and completed to an acceptable standard. One option was for the same contractor to complete the works, however Miss X and Mrs Y were reluctant to allow the contractor back and halted the works.
7. As an alternative option, the Council calculated the remaining funds from the grant it had agreed, and offered to instead pay this balance towards a different contractor of Miss X’s choice to complete the works.
8. Miss X arranged to have the remaining works done by another contractor, which she says resulted in a significant further cost to Mrs Y. The Council indicates
   Miss X has not yet accepted payment towards this of the remaining funds from the disabled facilities grant. Miss X says she refused to accept any of the options the Council offered.
9. I am satisfied the Council proposed suitable options in the circumstances. Had it had the opportunity, the contractor was willing to complete the works to an acceptable standard and this would not have incurred a further cost to Mrs Y. While the works completed ultimately cost more, this was due to Miss X’s choice to use a different contractor and is not unremedied injustice due to fault by the Council.
10. It is not for the Ombudsman to decide whether works were satisfactory or not, and the Council offered options which I am satisfied were appropriate to remedy any injustice caused by fault.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because I am satisfied the Council proposed suitable options to remedy the issues that arose. Miss X and Mrs Y chose not to accept the options, and the Council is not responsible for the additional costs incurred due to this.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman