Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with her request for adaptations and housing to meet the needs of her disabled child. The Council took too long to consider the recommendations and it did not deal with her complaints and review requests properly. It did not properly consider its discretion to admit her to its housing register. The Council’s shortcomings caused Miss X distress and uncertainty, but it is unlikely her family would have been rehoused sooner, or that the Council would have made the adaptations she requested. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X, make symbolic payments, backdate her housing priority, and share this decision with relevant staff.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council failed to:
• deal with her housing situation when her current housing no longer met her family’s needs, both in terms of the housing register and disabled adaptations;
• provide a specialist bed;
• deal with her complaints about this in good time; and
• communicate with her properly nor keep her informed of progress.
2. Miss X says that as a result of this she is living in a property that does not meet her child’s disability related needs. He is dysregulated and causes damage to himself and the property, and they are overcrowded.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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

What I have and have not investigated

5. Miss X has had difficulties for several years. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended).
6. In this case, Miss X complains about events from early in 2022. I have taken into account the difficult home circumstances, that Ms B was hopeful the Council would agree the adaptations recommended by the OT’s in December 2022, and that the Council took too long to respond to her complaints to it. As such, I have decided that it would not have been reasonable to expect Miss X to complain to us sooner, and I have extended the scope of my investigation to December 2022.
7. I have investigated the Council’s actions from December 2022 until when Miss X resubmitted her complaint to us in August 2024.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The law and guidance

Disabled person adaptations

10. Under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, councils can award Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG) to people whose disability means their home needs adaptation. If the person applying meets the qualifying criteria the council must award the grant.
11. Councils only approve grants for work they decide is necessary. An occupational therapist usually assesses need. A council must decide if the proposed works are necessary and appropriate to meet the needs of the disabled person. It must also be satisfied it is reasonable and practicable to carry out the works given the condition of the property to be adapted. In cases where major adaptations are required and it is difficult to provide a cost-effective solution, councils may consider the possibility of supporting a person to move to a more suitable home.

Housing Allocations

12. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
13. An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants who need to move on medical or welfare grounds.
14. The Council’s housing allocations policy sets out how the Council will decide priority between applicants. It will place applicants in bands A (highest need) to band D (lowest need). Band C is for people who are lacking a bedroom, and whose current home is impacting on their health condition or disability. Band B is for those whose housing is seriously impacting on their health or disability but they are able to stay there for three months pending alternative housing.
15. The Council’s policy also says that applicants will not qualify for its housing scheme if they are guilty of unacceptable behaviour, including those that have rent arrears. The policy goes on to say that the Council will fully consider the applicant’s individual circumstances when deciding to disqualify them from the scheme.
16. An applicant can ask the Council to review its decisions on the priority band awarded; the date on which the priority is applied; and a decision that they do not qualify for the housing scheme. The policy says the applicant must apply in writing for a review. If on an initial check, the Council is not minded to alter the decision, then it will pass the review request to a senior officer not involved with the decision.

Children’s social care

17. Section 17 of the Children Act 1989 says councils must safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area who are in need. A disabled child is a child in need.
18. Under the Children Act 1989, councils are required to provide services for children in need for the purposes of safeguarding and promoting their welfare. Where a referral is accepted under section 17 the council should lead a multi-agency assessment and compete it within 45 working days. Where the council’s children’s social care decides to provide services, it should develop a multiagency child in need plan which sets out which organisations and agencies will provide which services to the child and family. The plan must be reviewed within three months of the start of the child in need plan and further reviews should take place at least every six months thereafter. (Working Together to Safeguard Children) 

What happened

19. Miss X lives in a council property with her husband and children. One of her children is disabled. Miss X asked the Council to help her with various items and changes to the property to meet her child’s needs. An occupational therapist (OT) assessed the house and their needs in December 2022. The OT recommended that the Council:
• Review mould in the bathroom.
• Provide a safety bed for her child to reduce his risk of injury and access to the fuse board and provide a safe space to sleep and play.
• Install child safety locks on the windows to reduce the risk of the child climbing out.
• Complete a sensory assessment.
• Adapt the rear garden to provide level outdoor safety flooring, a weatherproof canopy and outdoor monitoring equipment so that the child could safely use the back garden.
• Adapt the ground floor utility room to provide a walk-in shower, a toilet, and a hand basin.
• Adapt the staircase to provide a secure high gate and add a partition wall the open part of the staircase.
• Provide a secure cupboard for the fuse box in the child’s bedroom .
20. The OT noted that the child cannot keep himself safe, and he will try to access downstairs during the night. The OT observed that he frequently bolted upstairs from Miss X’s supervision so that she had to leave the younger child (then a toddler) to make him safe. The assessment says the child often climbs out of windows so that Miss X has screwed the windows shut, and when he is dysregulated he will damage the property and himself. The child wears continence pads and needs adult support with changing, and he becomes distressed during bathtime.
21. Miss X also reported that the house is poorly insulated for sound, and noise from the neighbours causes her child to get dysregulated. She described that due to the house construction, when he gets upset he causes damage to the property and hurts himself.
22. I asked the Council for its housing case notes starting December 2022. It sent me the housing needs team notes starting from September 2023. However, it later sent me a letter dated 12 July 2023 addressed to Miss X setting out its decision that she did not qualify to join the housing register. The Council’s letter said that this was because she owed significant rent arrears, although it noted she was making regular payments to the arrears. The Council mentioned a consultant letter that Miss X had also submitted and said it had referred the matter to its Health and Housing Team for assessment. It did not mention the OT’s report or that the Council was considering adaptations to the house.
23. The Council’s letter set out Miss X’s right to ask for a review of its decision. This said that to change its decision Miss X would need to show her behaviour had changed such as making payments towards rent arrears.
24. The Council’s adaptations panel decided in August 2023, that it could not fund the bed nor the work to the outside areas because this was not in the housing service’s remit, but the request should be considered by the Council’s children’s social care service.
25. The Council had assessed the other work requested and decided that it would not be feasible to adapt the utility room into a downstairs bathroom because it is detached from the main house with a make-shift roof adjoining the house. It would take extensive building work to convert this space. It would not be safe to install the gate on the stairs, and it was not feasible to put in a partition wall to separate off the staircase.
26. Overall, the Council decided that it would not be reasonable or practical to adapt the current home and so it will not agree to any of the adaptation requests. It said it would support Miss X to be rehoused in suitable alternative accommodation. Miss X complained to the Council about its decision.
27. According to the case notes the Council has sent me, in September 2023, the Council’s housing need team considered Miss X’s housing situation and whether it could move her to a more suitable property. The housing service has explained that it was unaware of the OT assessment or that the Council had refused the disabled adaptations.
28. It considered the medical information it had and decided that the child would hurt himself more if he hit himself against a more solid construction; the hospital had advised on parenting strategies that may help; and Miss X’s son was due to start sleep medication. The Council’s notes say that it thought Miss X’s application should be in Band C but it is not clear when it told Miss X of its decision. I asked the Council for its correspondence with Miss X but it has not sent me this.
29. In November 2023, the family’s health visitor wrote a letter of support. She said the disabled child would be caused significant distress if he had to share a room because of his sensory needs. However, the Council decided that there was not sufficient evidence to suggest it needed to reconsider the priority.
30. It seems that by November the Council had told Miss X that it considered she should be in Band C because she asked the Council to review this decision. The housing need team visited Miss X at home. It explained that there was not sufficient evidence to increase the priority to Band B.
31. The Council’s case notes show that it considered whether it should increase Miss X’s priority to Band B because it could not adapt the property. It also considered referring Miss X to its complex needs panel which could consider solutions to her housing situation. The Council decided that there was no urgent need to move the family, and that some of the OT’s recommendations were not warranted.
32. Although the Council had seemingly made a decision about Miss X’s priority it still had not altered its decision that she did not qualify to join the register because she had rent arrears. In November 2023, Miss X asked the Council to consider her case ats the complex case panel.
33. Miss X asked the Council to assess her son’s social care needs as a child with disabilities in July and November 2023 as she was finding it hard to cope with meeting his needs. The Council decided that the family could be supported via early help and did not meet the criteria to be supported by the child with disability team.
34. In February 2024, the Council’s children’s services completed a child and family assessment, following another request from Miss X for support. The assessment sets out the child’s significant needs. It says that while Miss X is providing him a high standard of care, she is finding it difficult to manage this and it is impacting on her mental health and the attention she can give the other children. The Council deemed Miss X’s son a child in need due to his disability and so it made a child in need plan and continued to make statutory visits to him at home to check on the aims of the plan.
35. The plan centred on meeting the housing need and Council’s children’s services continued to support Ms B with her housing and adaptations requests and acted as a point of contact point between her and the housing service.
36. In the meantime (November 2023), the Council decided to do another OT assessment. The new OT noted that the Council had added the partition wall to close in the stairs as per the earlier OT recommendation but had not actioned any of the other recommendations.
37. At the end of January 2024, the Council’s Equipment Panel considered the OT’s recommendations for a safe bed. The Panel did not approve the bed as it considered the bed would be used as a constraint. The Council consulted senior OTs to discuss an appropriate bed. The Panel considered the information but it still did not approve the safe bed. Miss X has told me she still does not have a suitable bed for her child.
38. This OT recommended that the Council explore the possibility of a single storey extension to provide an additional bedroom and bathing facilities. The Council should also consider further alterations to the stairs, a high gate, window restrictors, a secure cupboard door for the fuse box in the child’s bedroom, and padding in his bedroom, a wipeable floor there, as well as a safe bed. The assessment was updated in February and October 2024 and marked as urgent.
39. In February 2024, the Council held a multi-disciplinary team meeting to discuss a solution. It recommended a different kind of bed and padding to the walls of the child’s bedroom. The Council’s adaptation panel met and recommended some minor work, but Miss X decided that she would rather move house instead. In April 2024, the Council decided that it would admit Miss X’s application to the housing register despite her rent arrears, and award her Band B priority. The Council appointed a new Family Help Keyworker to support Miss X.
40. Miss X complained to the Council in April 2024. The Council’s case notes show that Miss X was upset that the Council did not backdate Band B priority and that she had been asking for adaptations for so long when the end result was that she would need to be rehoused.
41. In May, the Council completed a feasibility study and decided it could create an extra bedroom from the dining room. However, Miss X tells me that this is not practical because there is no separate dining room, and the family would need to walk through the newly formed bedroom to get to the kitchen. The Council says that Miss X also refused to allow it to fit a high gate and lockable door to her son’s bedroom. The Council’s case notes also say that Miss X did not want to move and so it asked a social worker to discuss the options with her.
42. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint on 5 June 2024. It said that it had added her to the housing register in April 2024 and awarded her Band B priority. It also noted that there is an average waiting time of 77 weeks for a four-bedroom house. The Council apologised that it had taken so long to address her complaints. It offered £150 in respect of the distress this had caused her.
43. The Council says its OT service continued to work with Miss X to meet her child’s safe sleeping needs. In October 2024, Miss X asked to use some of her child’s social care budget to pay for a specialist bed. The Council approved this request in January 2025. The Council says that it has arranged further surveys of the house and it will then consider extension plans.
44. The Council has made improvements to its service so that it can reduce the backlog of people waiting for an OT assessment. This has in turn, increased the number of referrals for adaptations and equipment. The Council has had to remodel its service again due to staff changes. It commissioned an external provider to complete OT assessments and has worked with the NHS to streamline processes so that cases are not referred so often between teams. The Council also intends to complete a review of the whole OT process to see where it can further improve its service.
45. In response to my enquiries, the Council has said that the case was complex and it was not always clear what Miss X wanted. It says that it has undertaken a significant amount of work. However, it has acknowledged that it allowed some unacceptable delay and it has offered to pay Miss X £500 in recognition of the distress it caused her.

Findings

46. The Council took too long to consider the first OT report. The OT made recommendations in December 2022 but the Council did not reach a decision on these until August 2023.
47. When considering the recommendations of the OT assessments, the Council considered the information it had and arranged surveys to see what was needed and feasible. Its panel understood the OT’s recommendations and the limitations of the property, and so there was no fault in how it reached its decisions not to fund the adaptations.
48. The Council has told me that its OT service continued to support Miss X. I can see that children’s social care became involved with the family in December 2023 (one year after the OT’s original recommendations), but I cannot see how the Council comprehensively considered what safety measures to take either, those recommended by the OT or new measures once it had decided that it could not adapt the property.
49. The Council had partitioned part of the staircase, but had not fitted a gate or any other safety features to the stairs and it had not addressed the fuse box in the child’s room.
50. In August 2023, the Council said that its children’s social care service would need to consider the recommendation for a safe bed, but the Council did not consider this until January 2024. It refused this, and although it considered another option it did not approve an alternative until a year later in January 2025, two years after the OT had first recommended a safe bed.
51. I appreciate this is a complex case and that the Council has properly considered the adaptations and tried to offer other solutions, but the Council should have resolved how to make the property safer much sooner. Even if it later found that the bed and other equipment and alterations was not suitable, the recommendations were based on identified risks, and the Council did not offer Miss X many practical alternatives for too long.
52. When the Council refused the adaptations in August 2023, it said it would help Miss X to move house. However, it did not properly coordinate this alternative way to meet the disabled child’s needs.
53. The Council has not shown that it fully considered Miss X’s individual circumstances, when it refused to admit her to the housing register between July 2023 and April 2024. Its letter to Miss X makes no mention of the OT recommendations, nor how the Council had or was in the process of, considering these. In addition, an email from the housing team to children’s services in January 2024, says that Miss X would need to clear the rent arrears before the Council could admit her to the register. When the Council is considering discretion, we would expect it to set out its reasons fully and show it has considered all the relevant factors.
54. The Council should have reconsidered its position much sooner, having decided that it could not adapt her property in August 2023. Arguably very little changed between August 2023 and April 2024, when the Council finally admitted Miss X to the housing register. The Council’s correspondence says that Miss X was making payments to the rent arrears prior to July 2023, and although she continued to do so, the rent arrears would not have reduced significantly in that time frame. On balance it is likely that had the Council properly reconsidered Miss X’s housing application sooner, it would have used its discretion to admit her to the register in August 2023 having refused the adaptations.
55. Miss X asked the Council to reconsider the banding (both the band and the date it should be applied from) and its decision that she should not be admitted to the register either directly with the housing service, or via the children’s social care team. The Council addressed Miss X’s concerns with further explanation, but given her circumstances, it should have considered whether Miss X was making a formal review request and dealt with this in accordance with the process set out in its policy.
56. I can see that Miss X felt the Council did not keep her up to date with how it might help her housing situation, however, as there was little progress I would not have expected it to contact Miss X. The Council did keep up to date with its child in need statutory visits to Miss X to review how her son’s needs were being met.
57. There was fault in the Council’s complaint handling. Miss X complained to the Council in August 2023, it responded to her in September 2023 redirecting her to children’s social care. However, the Council did not fully respond until June 2024.
58. I appreciate that the case is complex, but the delay in considering the recommendations and Miss X’s request for adaptations caused her distress and uncertainty. As the Council did not agree the adaptations, I cannot say that Miss X was without these longer than she should have been. However, it is clear that the Council did not take enough action to reduce the risks it had identified to Miss X’s child in good time, which left Miss X without the practical support she needed.
59. The Council should have properly considered all of Miss X’s circumstances when it decided not to admit her to the housing register. It should have dealt with Miss X’s challenges to the housing decisions in line with its policy. The Council has provided some information about its waiting list and it is unlikely that Miss X would have been rehoused sooner if the Council had acted without fault. However, the Council’s shortcomings caused her distress and uncertainty.
60. The Council’s delays in dealing with Miss X’s complaints put her to additional time and trouble.
61. Overall, Miss X still has no solution to the problems her housing causes her in meeting her son’s care needs. She says there have been very few changes to the challenges she faces in the property.

Back to top

Action

62. The Council will within two months of the date of this decision:
• Apologise to Miss X. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Make a symbolic payment to Miss X of £500 in recognition of the distress and uncertainty it caused her when it took too long to consider the OT’s recommendations, failed to offer her practical alternatives to the adaptations, and failed to consider her individual circumstances when making decisions on her housing application, and took too long to reconsider this.
• Make a symbolic payment to Miss X of £150 in recognition of the time and trouble it put her to when it failed to deal with her review requests and complaint properly.
• Backdate Miss X’s Band B priority to when it first refused the adaptations in August 2023.
• Review what safety measures are needed to reduce the risks to the child while the family waits for alternative housing. In so doing, the Council should make sure it coordinates the functions of children’s social care and housing services.
• Share this decision with the relevant staff.
63. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

64. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman