Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to carry out additional work to fix issues, he said were caused by building works the Council completed under a Disabled Facilities Grant. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome he wants as only the courts can decide on liability for damage to property.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with building works completed at his home under a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG). In particular, Mr X complained:

• the completed works were unsuitable or not to a satisfactory standard;

• the builders caused damaged to his home, and;

• the builders failed to complete all the agreed works.

2. He now wants the Council to carry out further works and fix any damage he believes the builders caused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. 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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

•we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained that works the Council commissioned at his home under a DFG, were not suitable for his needs and caused damage to his home which he wants the Council to fix.
8. In addition, Mr X complained the builders did not complete all the work they said they would. He wants the Council to arrange for these works to be completed.
9. The Council responded to say it had visited Mr X’s home and decided the works and any repairs already carried out under the DFG were to a satisfactory standard. It had completed an assessment and found the adaptions met Mr X’s family’s needs. It explained it did not uphold his complaint and it would not be completing any further work on his house.
10. The Council said it understood Mr X felt misled about how much the builders would do. However, it did not have any records which showed it had agreed to complete the work Mr X said was outstanding.
11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the adaptations were unsuitable, because the Council has already explained why it believed they were and any further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.
12. Additionally, we would not investigate this complaint as we could not achieve the outcome Mr X wants. This is because Mr X’s complaint appears to be that he considers the Council to be liable for further works and repairs to his home. We cannot make findings on claims of negligence and liability, and we cannot order the Council to carry out additional building works. These are legal matters only insurers or the courts can decide. If Mr X considers the Council negligent or liable for damage to his property, it is reasonable for Mr X to make a claim on the Council’s insurance and, if needed, pursue the claim at court.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we cannot achieve the outcome he wants. Only the courts can decide on liability for damage to property.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman