Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to reject Dr X’s application for a disabled facilities grant. This is because we would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Dr X complains the Council has treated her unfairly by refusing to carry out adaptations in line with its disabled facilities grant scheme.
2. She said the Council’s decision has caused her stress and financial loss.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. A disabled facilities grant (DFG) is a scheme run by the Council which enables the applicant to have adaptations carried out so they can move safely around their home.
7. Dr X applied for a DFG and the Council carried out a housing occupational therapy assessment. The Occupational Therapist (OT) observed Dr X’s mobility and surveyed her home. The OT identified Dr X would benefit from handrails in her bathroom and downstairs toilet but did not approve further adaptations.
8. Dr X was unhappy with the assessment and opted to carry out the adaptations privately.
9. Dr X wants us to find the Council at fault for failing to approve her DFG application. She would also like us to recommend that the Council retroactively fund the adaptations she has already carried out. The Council was required to assess Dr X’s home and physical health to decide whether she needed the adaptations to move around safely in her home. The OT assessed Dr X’s home and physical presentation and did not approve the adaptations as suitable. There is no evidence that the assessment was flawed or carried out incorrectly. We will not criticise the merits of decision which has been correctly made. In addition, we cannot recommend that the Council fund the works Dr X has completed, as this is not in line with the Council’s policy.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Dr X’s complaint because we would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman