Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in completing a disabled facilities grant adaptation. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained on behalf of his late parents. He said the Council delayed completing adaptations to their home, which were not completed before they died.
2. Mr X said the Council’s actions caused frustration and wrongly raised his parents’ expectations. He wants the Council to improve the disabled facilities grant (DFG) process by ensuring the Council keeps applicants informed on progress and by providing completion dates.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X said the Council agreed to the DFG late 2022. However, he said it was not until February 2023, the Council progressed the application and appointed an Officer to oversee the project. He said that was following the intervention of his MP.
9. We will not investigate this early part of Mr X’s complaint. We expect a person to complain to us within 12 months of a council doing something wrong. Mr X did not complain to us until September 2024. Therefore, this part of his complaint is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate.
10. We have used our discretion to consider Mr X’s complaints from February 2023 onwards. That is because Mr X approached the Council about escalating his complaint to the Ombudsman in February 2024. The Council said it needed to respond first but then failed to do so. This is good reason for Mr X not coming to us then.
11. The Council has 12 months from the date of approving the application to complete the work agreed. Mr X’s complaint indicates the Council did not complete the work in the statutory timeframe. In a letter the Council sent to Mr X it confirmed that some delays were around finalising design plans, seeking planning advice and contractors not providing quotes for the work. It indicates the project was three-four months behind schedule. Mr X’s parents died before the work was completed.
12. We will not investigate this complaint. We cannot remedy any injustice caused to Mr X’s parents caused by the delays. Therefore, there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by an investigation. In addition, I have reviewed the evidence provided by Mr X and the Council. There is no evidence of systemic failings that indicate a need for service improvements.
13. The Council has failed to respond to Mr X’s complaint about the matter. Although we recognise the frustration that has caused, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaint processes when we are not investigating the substantive matter.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman