Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council refused a relocation grant. There is not enough evidence of fault in how it reached its decision to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mx W complained the Council delayed in completing an Occupational Therapy (OT) assessment. They said because of that delay, it had refused them a grant to support their house move. They said they needed to move because their last property was not suitable for their needs. Mx W said they had to install flooring in their new property. They want the Council to contribute to this and reimburse their moving costs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mx W contacted the Council for an OT assessment in April 2025. The Council completed an OT assessment in May 2025 and June 2025. Those assessments did not state Mx W’s property was not suitable for them, or that they needed to move.
7. The Council’s Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) team considered the request for a grant to support Mx W’s move. It said they were not eligible, as the OT assessments did not identify any adaptations needed to meet Mx W’s needs, or that relocation was essential. The DFG team also said it would not fund flooring Mx W had bought for their new property as DFG could not be applied for retrospectively.
8. Although Mx W is unhappy with the Council’s decision we will not investigate. There is no evidence of delay in the Council completing the OT assessments. The Council has considered their request for DFG funding and set out reasons why they are not eligible. There is not enough evidence of fault in how it reached that decision to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mx W’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