Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council have managed his Disabled Facilities Grant application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) application. He does not want a further Occupational Therapy (OT) assessment and wants the Council to use the same contractor his housing association uses for general repairs. Mr X also complains about the standard of repairs carried out by his housing association.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as housing associations. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X applied for a DFG to fund adaptations to his home which is managed by a Housing Association.
7. The Council explained to Mr X to assess eligibility and determine what works were needed, an OT assessment was required. Mr X originally declined this visit, saying a previous assessment had already been done by another Council.
8. The Council also explained that some of the works Mr X requested were the responsibility of his landlord, and a site visit was needed to assess what could be covered by the DFG.
9. Mr X asked for the Council to use the same contractor as the Housing Association to minimise disruption. The Council explained that, due to its procurement process and the need to ensure appropriate use of public funds, it could not guarantee a specific contractor would be used.
10. Since Mr X’s initial complaint to the Ombudsman, an OT has carried out an assessment, the Council has carried out a survey and has agreed a programme of works. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault with the actions of the Council. It is entitled to obtain its own OT assessment and to use its own approved contractors.
11. If Mr X remains unhappy with the repairs carried out by housing association, he should raise those concerns with the Housing Ombudsman Service, as we have no power to investigate the actions of housing associations.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council have managed his Disabled Facilities Grant application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman