Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about damage caused when completing minor adaptations. The Council’s contractor has offered to take appropriate steps to rectify the damage and further investigation by us is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about damage caused by a Council contractor when carrying out minor adaptations under the Care Act 2014. Mr X is unhappy with the contractor’s proposal to repaint the affected wall and wants the whole room redecorated.

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:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

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

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)

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

What happened

6. When installing a stair rail in the property where Mr X lives, the Council’s contractor’s drill hit a pocket of mortar, which caused the plaster on the other side of the wall to be damaged. The contractor carried out a number of further visits to replaster the affected part of the wall and to identify an appropriate paint colour. They offered to repaint the whole of the affected wall, but Mr X refused this because he wanted the entire room repainted. Mr X allowed the contractor to repaint the patch of wall that had been replastered, which they did. Photos provided by the Council show the new paint colour is not an exact match to the paint colour on the rest of the wall, but it is quite close.

My assessment

7. The Council’s contractor accepted responsibility for the accidental damage to the wall caused when carrying out minor adaptations and took the steps described above to rectify the damage. Although it was not possible to find an exact match to the existing paint colour, the contractor offered to repaint the entire wall in a colour that is very close it.
8. Considering all the circumstances, the Council has taken appropriate steps to remedy the injustice caused and it told us it is continuing to work with Mr X to resolve the matter. Further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome. In addition, we are not able to resolve matters of legal liability or damages so, if he remains unhappy, it would be reasonable for Mr X to consider court action or a claim on either the Council or its contractor’s insurance.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has offered an appropriate remedy, and further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman