Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to install a bath in Miss B’s bathroom. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Miss B complains the Council failed to consider her needs properly for disabled works to her bathroom. Miss B says the Council is not allowing her to have a bath added to her bathroom. She feels the Council has not properly considered her needs by completing a proper assessment. Miss B says she cannot take care of her personal needs properly and this impacts on her mental wellbeing. She wants the Council to consider her personal needs seriously and provide her with a bath.

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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(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. Miss B lives in a property that has a level access shower in the bathroom and no bath. She referred herself to the Council’s occupational therapy (OT) service in February 2025 so it could consider assessing her needs for a bath.
6. The OT service told Miss B the Council could not remove a level access shower and replace with a bath because the shower met her long-term needs. A Council officer telephoned Miss B a few weeks later to arrange for her to attend an assessment centre.
7. When Miss B went to the assessment centre she discussed the difficulties she was having with an assessor. The assessor advised her it was unlikely the Council could install a bath as the level access shower would meet her
   longer-term needs. The Council said the assessor ordered a grab rail and agreed to seek advice from the housing department about Miss B’s bath request. Miss B contacted the OT following the visit to request a bath but did not receive a reply.
8. The Council investigated Miss B’s complaint and upheld it because she was not sent a record of her visit to the assessment centre. It found an OT had not reviewed her bath situation or assessed her needs properly and explored any alternatives with her.
9. The Council apologised to Miss B and said it would arrange a priority home visit to review Miss B’s bathroom, assess her needs and provide her with a copy of the assessment. It said it would also make referral to the housing department so
   Miss B’s needs could be considered.
10. The OT completed a home visit to Miss B in July 2025. Miss B told the OT she wanted a bath so she could have a soak and help relieve the pain she was experiencing. The OT noted there was a privately purchased freestanding bath in the bathroom but this had not been properly installed. Miss B was filling and emptying the bath manually using the shower and a bucket. She said she was finding this difficult.
11. As part of the assessment process the OT liaised with an Adaptations Surveyor to see if it was feasible to have a bath installed at Miss B’s property. The Surveyor confirmed this was not possible under the disabled facilities grant rules. The Surveyor told the OT Miss B could submit a request to the Housing Team to install a bath herself.
12. The OT passed this information to Miss B by email. The OT also offered to arrange for a shower seat to be fitted in Miss B’s bathroom so she could soak using the shower water. Miss B refused this option according to the case notes so the OT then closed the case.
13. The OT service contacted Miss B in February 2026 when it was told by a third party she wanted a shower seat fitting. An Ot spoke to Miss B after making several efforts to contact her. The notes of the telephone call state Miss B said she wanted a bath installed and refused the shower seat. When the OT told her this was not possible Miss B asked the OT to close the referral.
14. We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. The Council has confirmed and explained its decision about the installation of the bath. As an alternative it offered Miss B a shower seat. It also said she could make a request to install a bath herself (self-funded). Miss B can contact the Council if she wishes to accept either of these options. We cannot achieve the outcome Miss B wants.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman