Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about bathroom works, funded by a disabled facilities grant. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate now. Further, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about bathroom works, which the Council funded using a Disabled Facilities Grant.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

What happened

7. The Council assessed Mr X as needing adaptations to his property to meet his disability needs. These included installing a wet room. That work was completed by December 2022. In February 2023, Mr X raised a concern about the size of the basin. He subsequently raised concerns about the bathroom tiles not matching the original tiles and said the floor had not been properly fitted, which meant parts of the vinyl were lifting.
8. In complaint responses in 2024, the Council said:
• the basin was the size agreed when the Occupational Therapist (OT) assessed Mr X’s needs and was the size included in the plans, which Mr X signed to confirm he agreed with. Further, whilst Mr X would prefer a larger basin, this was not considered to be a disability need;
• matching the colour of bathroom tiles is very difficult. In this case, the original tiles were an imperial measurement and tiles are now metric, which means they are slightly different in size;
• whilst the Council had assessed what work was needed to meet Mr X’s disability needs and had funded the works using a disabled facilities grant (DFG), Mr X had used his own contractor to carry out the work. It noted the contractor had visited and proposed a solution to the lifting vinyl, any dispute about whether that was the correct approach was between Mr X and the contractor and the Council could not get involved.

My assessment

9. We usually expect people to complain to us within 12 months of the events complained about. Mr X was aware of the size of the basin by December 2022 and the other defects by February 2024. The Council’s complaints process was completed in April 2024. He did not complain to us until September 2025, so the complaint is late. There is no indication Mr X could not have complained to us earlier and there are no good reasons to decide to investigate now.
10. Even if there were good reasons for Mr X’s delay in complaining to us, we would not investigate further because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. Its role was to assess the works needed to meet Mr X’s disability needs and to fund those works. The basin installed was in line with the OT assessment. The Council was not required to match the bathroom tiles exactly with the originals or replace all the tiling as this would be for aesthetic reasons and is not needed to meet a disability need. The Council did not carry out or oversee the works and so is not responsible for them. It was therefore not at fault for the Council to refer Mr X back to the contractor when he raised concerns about the installation of the vinyl flooring.
11. For all the above reasons, we will not consider this complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is late and there are no good reasons to decide to investigate now. Further, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman