Summary: There was no fault in how the Council decided not to fund a ramp so Mr B could store a mobility scooter under its minor adaptations policy. However, the Council’s communication about this was at times unclear, particularly on whether council tenants can apply for a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG). There was no fault in how it dealt with Mr B’s request for other minor adaptations.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains that the Council:
• did not properly assess his request for a mobility scooter ramp recommended by a private occupational therapist (OT) report;
• did not conduct its own occupational therapist assessment for this and other needs; and
• delayed in providing minor adaptations that it had agreed to make.
2. Mr B’s representative says that Mr B fell and sustained serious injuries because the minor adaptations were not in place. She also says the Council’s failings have impacted on Mr B’s wellbeing as he cannot easily store and charge his mobility scooter.

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 how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. I considered the information provided by Mr B’s representative. I considered the information provided by the Council including its file documents. I also considered the law and guidance set out below. Both parties had the opportunity to comment on a draft of this statement. I have considered all comments received before issuing this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The law and guidance

6. Disabled Facilities Grants (DFGs) 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.
7. Relevant councils must promote ‘wellbeing’ when carrying out care and support functions. Wellbeing includes the suitability of living accommodation. The Care Act 2014 recognises suitable accommodation as one way of meeting care and support needs. Prevention is critical to the Care Act and home adaptation is an example of secondary prevention.
8. In March 2022 the government issued non-statutory guidance “Disabled facilities Grant (DFG) Delivery: Guidance for local authorities in England.
9. This guidance advises councils in England on how they can effectively and efficiently deliver DFG funded adaptations to best serve the needs of local older and disabled people. It brings together and sets out in one place existing policy frameworks, legislative duties and powers, together with recommended best practice, to help councils provide an adaptation service to disabled tenants and residents in their area.
10. The 1996 Act says that a tenant can apply for a DFG. The March 2022 guidance makes clear that this includes Council tenants.
11. The March 2022 guidance says the council must assess whether a person needs the adaptation to meet one of the purposes set out in the Act. This includes facilitating access to the person’s home and garden. The guidance says this is where there is a need to remove any obstacles which are preventing the disabled person from moving freely in and out of the property.

The Council’s policy

12. A council can fund minor adaptations costing up to £1,000 for the purposes of assisting with nursing at home or aiding daily living. The Council’s own policy on this says the Council will not assess for or provide storage, access ramps or charging points for a scooter as it does not prescribe mobility scooters.

What happened

13. Mr B is disabled and has very restricted mobility. He is a council tenant. In January 2023, Mr B’s representative emailed the Council to say he had approached her charity for help with a mobility scooter and the organisation would complete a private OT assessment to decide if he needed a scooter.
14. The OT’s assessment says that Mr B can independently negotiate the steps up to his house with the support rails and his walking stick. However he could not access the community due to his poor mobility.
15. The private OT recommended that Mr B use a mobility scooter and the charity agreed to fund this. The OT recommended alterations to Mr B’s home including a ramp so that Mr B could use, store, and charge the scooter on his property. The OT also recommended some minor adaptations to Mr B’s bathroom: fitting a raised toilet seat, replacing a shower chair, and providing some grab rails.
16. The Council initially said that its OT would need to assess Mr B. However, the Council then agreed to do the minor adaptations to the bathroom without its own OT assessment. It says it would not usually carry out recommendations of a private OT, but it had previously assessed Mr B’s needs and the private OT’s recommendations for changes to the bathroom accorded with its own assessments.
17. The Council considered Mr B’s request for a ramp and charging point. It decided it would not fund this work. The Council’s Minor Adaptations Policy says the Council will not assess for or provide storage, access ramps or charging points for a scooter as it does not prescribe mobility scooters. If a person decides to privately buy a scooter, then it is their responsibility to make these arrangements.
18. Mr B’s representative asked the Council for details of its Council’s policy and how to complain about the decision. The Council did not send details and so Mr B’s representative complained to the Council. She reiterated that Mr B was not asking for scooter storage, but for access to the storage he already had. The representative also asked the Council about its DFG scheme.
19. The Council responded to the complaint. It said that a ramp was a minor adaptation so it would not refer this for a DFG. Mr B’s representative replied that some ramps are minor adaptations but others would fall under the DFG scheme. She asked the Council if it was avoiding the DFG legislation to the detriment of a disabled person.
20. The Council clarified that it would assess whether a person needs ramps or handrails to enter their home safely. It would consider handrails and small steps costing less than £1,000 under its Minor Adaptations Policy. If the person could not access their property using these, the Council would consider a ramp. However, The private OT report said that Mr B could access his property independently using the rails already in place.
21. The Council confirmed that it does refer some requests for ramps to the DFG process, but Mr B could access his property and the ramp was merely to allow him to store his scooter. The Council said this means the work was not eligible for a DFG for the ramp.
22. In response to my enquiries, the Council has said that it does not refer council tenants for DFG assessment, but would refer a person if they are a private tenant or owner occupier. The Council refers to the March 2022 guidance which says that councils should self-fund home adaptations through its own housing revenue account.
23. The Council has also made clear to me however, that it uses the same assessment process for all applicants and so a council tenant is not treated less favourably when the Council does not use the DFG process to consider adaptations to their home. Furthermore, in this case, the Council is satisfied that it would not have approved the ramp under DFG or any other scheme because Mr B can access his property.
24. Accessing the community is an eligible need under the Care Act 2014. I asked the Council to consider whether Mr B has an eligible need to access the community and whether this could be met by providing a ramp for his mobility scooter.
25. The Council has explained that although Mr B may need a ramp to access the existing storage area, he does not need a ramp to take the mobility scooter from his property onto the public highway and into the community. In addition, the Council referred to the OT’s report, noting that Mr B can walk a limited distance with a walking stick, and then could organise transport to access the community. This means that the mobility scooter is not Mr B’s sole means to access the community.
26. The Council referred the request for the toilet seat, shower seat, and grab rail to its minor adaptations team. The Council allocated this work to a contractor at the end of February and the work was completed the following week. Sadly between the referral in January and the work being completed in early March, Mr B fell in his bathroom and sustained some serious injuries.

Analysis

27. There is no fault in how the Council reached its decision not to fund the ramp under its minor adaptation policy. The Council has explained how it reached this decision in line with its policy. The Council also considered whether Mr B would need a ramp to access his property as this would allow the work to be done. However, the private OT’s report is clear that Mr B could access the steps to his property using his walking stick and the handrail. The Council has explained that it was able to rely on the private OT’s assessment because it accorded with the assessments of Mr B’s needs it had previously made.
28. The Council’s communication about Mr B’s eligibility for a DFG has been confusing at times. It was not clear in what circumstances it would refer a request for a ramp for a DFG assessment. It has also told me that it refers only private tenants and owner occupiers for a DFG, and will not refer a council tenant for a DFG.
29. I appreciate the Council’s comments that its approach does not disadvantage council tenants. However, it needs to make sure that its explanations about this are consistent and accord with the law and government guidance, which together make clear a council tenant can also apply for a DFG.
30. The Statutory Guidance says :
• Disabled Facilities Grants are capital grants that are available to people of all ages and in all housing tenures (i.e. whether renting privately, from a social landlord or council, or owner-occupiers) to contribute to the cost of adaptations.
• Eligible council tenants can apply for a DFG in the same way as any other applicant. However local housing authorities with a Housing Revenue Account should self-fund home adaptations for council tenants through this account.
31. This means that councils cannot use government funding to adapt their own properties. But this relates to how adaptations are funded. It does not affect applicants and does not mean that council tenants cannot apply for a DFG.
32. DFGs are mandatory grants. Councils must pay them where the statutory tests are met. A council can operate a separate scheme for its own tenants. But where a council refuses adaptations to one of its tenants under such a scheme, we consider it should tell the tenant they can apply for a means tested DFG, which, if the criteria are met, is mandatory.
33. This means the Council is wrong to suggest that it will not refer a council tenant for a DFG and it should have been clear about Mr B’s eligibility in its communications with his representative and with the Ombudsman. However, I accept that it is very unlikely that Mr B would have been eligible for a DFG because the ramp is not needed for him to access his house and garden. It is open to the Council to make that decision as it has considered Mr B’s circumstances, the OT assessment, and the DFG guidance and legislation. This means that although the Council’s communications were sometimes unclear, there was little injustice to Mr B as a result.
34. The Council has considered whether it should fund the ramp as a social care need for Mr B to access the community. It has considered the OT’s assessment and made a decision based on this. There is no basis for me to criticise the Council’s decision.
35. The Council received the request for the minor adaptations to the bathroom in January and the work was complete at the beginning of March. Ideally, the Council would have completed the work sooner and it is very unfortunate that Mr B fell in that time and sustained serious injuries. However, the time it took for the Council to do the work is not so long that it is fault.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. The Council will within one month of this decision statement:
• Remind relevant staff that council tenants can apply for a Disabled Facilities Grant, and ensure that any guidance to staff is clear on this.
37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

38. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council but this did not cause Mr B any injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman