Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council refused to complete adaptations to his home. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council refused to install a downstairs wet room in his property. He said the Council had told him he would need to move in the future if he needed this adaptation. He said he did not want to move and forcing him to do so would be a breach of his Human Rights and the Equality Act. Mr X said the Council’s response had caused him stress.

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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council completed an Occupational Therapist’s (OT) assessment after Mr X asked for a downstairs wet room. The OT did not assess Mr X as needing the adaptations. They said the property had already been adapted to meet Mr X’s needs and he could access the existing facilities.
6. Mr X complained so the Council completed a second assessment. That was completed by a different OT. The second OT came to the same findings. They suggested to Mr X that if his needs changed in the future, he may wish to consider being rehoused. Mr X complained.
7. In its response, the Council explained Mr X was not eligible for a Disabled Facilities Grant as the requested adaptations were not necessary and appropriate. It said that even if the outcome of the OT assessment was different, it was unlikely the Council would agree to the adaptations. It said Mr X was under-occupying his house, therefore it was most likely the Council would not consider the adaptations reasonable or practicable, as it would be a better use of Council resources to rehouse him.
8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council. It has completed two OT assessments, and both have found he can access the facilities in his property. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council completed those assessments to justify our involvement. If in the future Mr X’s needs change, he would need to ask for a new OT assessment. Any decision the Council makes following the outcome of that would be a new complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman