Summary: Mr X complained Wolverhampton Homes, on behalf of the Council, took too long to complete works to adapt his kitchen. He also complained it did not provide sufficient temporary facilities during the works, did not keep him updated about the works and installed different kitchen units to those agreed. We found fault by Wolverhampton Homes, on behalf of the Council, on these matters. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and make him a payment in recognition of the injustice caused to him and the extra costs he incurred.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about works carried out by Wolverhampton Homes, on behalf of the Council, to adapt his kitchen to meet his wife’s needs. He complained Wolverhampton Homes (WH):
1. took too long to complete the works;
2. did not provide adequate temporary kitchen facilities during the works;
3. did not provide adequate heating for their home during the works;
4. changed the style of kitchen units installed;
5. did not update him on the progress of works and were unsympathetic;
6. did not reimburse him the cost of his insurance excess when his wife’s car was damaged while parked on the road; and
7. did not replace a security light removed during the works.
2. Mr X stated the Council’s actions caused him and his family distress, inconvenience and financial disadvantage.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this report, we have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. We refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), as amended)
5. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(1)(A), and 25 (7) as amended)
6. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
7. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

What I have and have not investigated

8. Mr X’s home is owned by the Council. The Council contracts out management of its properties to Wolverhampton Home (WH). Wolverhampton Homes is, therefore, acting on behalf of the Council in providing adaptations to disabled tenants. Paragraph 5 explains we can investigate complaints about organisations providing services on behalf of the Council and so, I have investigated parts A-F of Mr X’s complaint.
9. I have not investigated Mr X’s concerns about WH decision not to replace a security light it removed during the works. This is because this matter is about the management of social housing and so the restriction in paragraph 6 applies.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

12. Disabled Facilities Grants are provided under the terms of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. Councils have a statutory duty to give grants to disabled people for certain adaptations. Before approving a grant, a council must be satisfied the work is necessary, meets the disabled person’s needs, and is reasonable and practicable.
13. In March 2022 the government issued non-statutory guidance “Disabled facilities Grant (DFG) Delivery: Guidance for local authorities in England.
14. This guidance advises councils in England on how they can effectively and efficiently deliver DFG funded adaptations to best serve the needs of local older and disabled people. It brings together and sets out in one place existing policy frameworks, legislative duties and powers, together with recommended best practice, to help councils provide an adaptation service to disabled tenants and residents in their area.

Key events

15. What follows is a summary of the key events in the complaint. It does not show everything that has happened.
16. Mr X lives with his wife (Mrs X) and their three children. Mrs X has a condition which affects her mobility. Their eldest child has a diagnosis of autism, and their youngest child has a diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
17. Mr X and his family are social housing tenants and have lived in their home since 2019.
18. An Occupational Therapist (OT) assessed Mr X’s home before they moved in and found it would need adaptations to make it accessible for Mrs X as her mobility decreased. The adaptations included works to the kitchen.
19. In 2023 works to adapt the kitchen were agreed and a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) approved.
20. On 6 November 2023 works to adapt the kitchen began at Mr X’s home.
21. On 10 November works stopped because of structural concerns.
22. On 17 November a Structural Engineer provided calculations. Building Control signed off the calculations on 27 November.
23. On 27 November Mr X made a stage one complaint. He complained about delays in recommencing works and a lack of communication from WH.
24. On 28 November works recommenced.
25. On 11 December WH replied to Mr X’s complaint. It explained the reason for the delay and said it had been in contact with Mr X. It did not uphold Mr X’s complaint.
26. On 15 February 2024 Mr X made another stage one complaint. He complained that works to adapt the kitchen are ongoing and have exceed the eight weeks it said works would take. He asked for an explanation and for the works to be completed. He also complained about damage to his wife’s car while it was parked on the road, which was necessary because the driveway was not accessible during the works.
27. On 16 February Mr X was asked to clear all items from his kitchen without warning.
28. On 19 February Mr X and his family were left without any kitchen facilities. He said the temporary measures provided were not suitable for his family. He said they did not have running water, cooking facilities or adequate heating and could not access their fridge.
29. Mr X bought a fridge to put in the living room and extra heaters to keep his home warm.
30. Also in February Mr X was told he could not have the kitchen units he previously selected. The units installed were a different style and colour.
31. On 25 February Mr X added events from 16 February onwards to his complaint.
32. On 14 March Mr X received a reply to his complaint. It said his complaint was not upheld. Unhappy Mr X escalated his complaint to stage two.
33. Case records show that during March works were delayed due to damaged kitchen units being received.
34. On 5 April the kitchen works were signed off as completed. However some issues remained outstanding. Case records show the outstanding matters were resolved in June 2024.
35. On 14 April Mr X received a reply to his stage two complaint. The reply:
• recognised Mr X and his family did not have access to a suitable temporary kitchen.
• acknowledged the temporary heating provided to him and his family was insufficient. It said it understood why Mr X brought additional heaters.
• accepted Mr X did not receive the level of service he should have and that he was not properly updated during the works.
• agreed the kitchen units installed were different to units it initially agreed to supply.

The reply apologised for the distress caused to him and his family and offered a payment of £350 (comprising of £150 for the cost of buying and using additional heaters and £200 as a goodwill payment). It said it would ask its contractor about reimbursing Mr X for the cost of takeaways he brought when he did not have adequate cooking facilities.

36. The reply did not uphold Mr X’s complaints about the works taking too long or that it was responsible for Mrs X’s car being damaged.
37. Mr X did not accept the payment offered and complained to the Ombudsman. His grounds of complaint remained the same.

Finding

Delay

38. Works began on 6 November 2023 but stopped on 10 November because of unforeseeable structural concerns. Works recommenced as soon as the structural calculations were signed off. I have seen no evidence of undue delay during this period.
39. Works recommenced on 28 November 2023. Works were signed off 18 weeks later, on 5 April. This is significantly longer than the eight weeks Mr X was told the works would take. Case records for this period show periods of inactivity and delays because of damaged kitchen units. I find evidence of delay by WH during this period.
40. The identified delay meant Mr X and his family had to put up with the inconvenience of building works for longer than necessary. This is injustice.

Communication

41. Case records show there was communication between Mr X and officers during the works to his home. However the records show Mr X initiated the contact by requesting updates or reporting concerns. There is no evidence officers proactively kept Mr X updated about the works including when structural issues halted work in November 2023 or when damaged kitchen units caused further delay in March 2024.
42. I also note the stage two reply to Mr X’s complaint acknowledged communication with him was below the level of service he should have received.
43. The poor communication Mr X received caused him frustration, uncertainty about what was happening and put him to the avoidable time and trouble of pursuing updates and making complaints. This is injustice.

Temporary facilities

44. Mr X and his family were without adequate cooking facilities for 7 weeks (the period 19 February 2024 and 5 April 2024). During this period Mr X and his family had to buy takeaway meals which are more expensive than cooking at home.
45. Mr X and his family were also without a sink downstairs during this period. This meant Mr X and his family had to wash kitchen items in the upstairs bathroom. They could also not wash their hands downstairs while preparing food. This caused the family avoidable inconvenience. The arrangements were especially difficult for Mrs X who had to use a stairlift to transport kitchen items upstairs.
46. Mr X also had to buy a fridge and heaters due to the inadequacy of the temporary arrangements. This put Mr X to the further avoidable expense.
47. Because of the insufficient and inadequate temporary arrangements put in place Mr X and his family were caused avoidable inconvenience and financial disadvantage This is injustice.

Driveway access

48. The case records do not show Mr X raised concerns about his wife not being able to park on the drive of their home before her car was damage. I also note his earlier complaint did not raise concerns that Mrs X could not park her car on the driveway. I do not find the Council at fault in this matter.

Back to top

Agreed Action

49. Within one month of my final decision the Council will:
• apologise to Mr X and his family for the additional fault identified in my investigation.
• pay Mr X £850 in recognition of the injustice arising from the identified fault. This figure comprises of £450 for the costs incurred by Mr X while he had inadequate temporary facilities and £400 for the frustration caused by delays in completing works and poor communication. This figure is inclusive of the £350 previously offered by the Council.
50. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

51. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused to Mr X and his family.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman