Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has delayed in carrying out adaptations to her home despite approving a disabled facilities grant over a year ago. We found the Council’s significant delays in carry out the works is fault. This fault has caused Mrs X difficulties, distress and uncertainty and meant she was unable to leave her home independently. The Council will apologise and make a symbolic payment to Mrs X. It will also review its processes.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council has delayed in carrying out adaptations to her home despite an occupational therapist recommending the works and the Council approving a disabled facilities grant over a year ago.
2. Mrs X says the situation is causing her considerable distress and difficulty as without the adaptation she is unable to leave her home independently.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I 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. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

Disabled Facilities Grants

7. 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.
8. In March 2022 the government issued non-statutory guidance “Disabled facilities Grant (DFG) Delivery: Guidance for local authorities in England.
9. 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.
10. The March 2022 guidance identifies five key stages to delivering home adaptations:
• Stage 1: First contact with the service. Councils should ensure the public has access to information and advice about the DFG process.
• Stage 2: First contact to assessment and identification of the relevant works. An occupational therapist (OT) will assess the person’s needs and potential solutions through home adaptations.
• Stage 3: Identification of the relevant works to submission of the formal grant application. The person completes and submits the application form together with designs and costing for the works (where necessary).
• Stage 4: Grant application to grant decision. The Council will check the application and issue a decision letter. If a council refuses a grant, it must explain why.
• Stage 5: Approval of grant to completion of works. The works are arranged and carried out and the necessary quality checks made.
11. A council should decide a grant application as soon as reasonably practicable. In addition, the timescales for moving through the stages will depend on the urgency and complexity of the works required. The guidance gives the following timescales:
• Urgent and simple works – 55 working days
• Non-urgent and simple works – 130 working days
• Urgent and complex works – 130 days
• Non-urgent and complex works – 180 working days
• Once the work is complete, the council must pay the grant in full within 12 months of the application date.

What happened here

12. Mrs X’s moved to a new property in September 2024. She asked the Council for an OT assessment for home adaptations and bathing aids. In addition, there was in a large window in the living room which Mrs X wanted to be adapted to form a door.
13. An OT visited Mrs X on 2 November 2024 to complete an assessment. The OT recommended equipment and minor adaptations to assist Mrs X in her home. They also recommended a major adaptation referral for the window in the living room to be converted into a door so that Mrs X could access the community with ease.
14. The Council contacted Miss X’s landlord in January 2025 requesting their permission to convert the window into a door. Mrs X’s landlord agreed in mid-March 2025. The Council then asked Mrs X to sign a DFG application form. Mrs X signed and returned the DFG form on 9 April 2025 and the Council accepted the application on 15 April 2025.
15. Mrs X subsequently made a formal complaint that none of the OT’s recommendations had been carried out. The Council responded on 10 July 2025 and apologised for the delays. It said this was due to a high demand on the service.
16. The Council told Mrs X that funding had now been approved for works to convert the window to a door. The contractor would contact her in the week commencing 21 July 2025 to arrange a pre-start date and discuss the works. The Council also told Mrs X that her landlord would contact her in the next 7 to 10 day regarding the minor adaptations to the property
17. Mrs X contacted the Council again on 5 August 2025 as neither the minor adaptations nor the major adaptations had progressed. She chased the Council again on 5 September 2025.
18. On 18 September 2025 the Council sent Mrs X formal approval of her application for a grant and said works could now start.
19. The Council’s records show that in early October 2025 the contractor was unable to start the works and withdrew. The Council retendered the works in December 2025.
20. There is no record the Council updated Mrs X or informed her of the issues/ progress of the DFG application. The Council says the surveyor updated Mrs X on several occasions by telephone but there is no record of these calls. It says it has reminded its surveyors to record all conversations.
21. The Council approved funding for a new contractor in March 2026. The contractor requested clarification regarding the door to be fitted and following a joint visit with an OT, the Council commissioned a custom made door in June 2026. As this door takes several weeks to manufacture the Council anticipates the works will be finished in August 2026.
22. In response to our enquiries the Council apologises for the delays in completing the works. It says the delays primarily arose from procurement and contractual issues, with further delay when the contractor withdrew.
23. The Council says Mrs X’s property was included as part of a wider programme of works commissioned by the Council, rather than a standalone project. It says this enables the Council to procure contractors more efficiently and deliver works at scale.
24. The Council says this approach can affect the sequencing, timing and coordination of works, as delivery is aligned with the contractor’s programme across all properties within that group.

Analysis

25. It is clear from the documentation and the Council accepts there were delays in dealing with Mrs X’s DFG application and progressing the works.
26. The documentation does not show how the Council classified the urgency and complexity of the works required under Mrs X’s DFG. Even if it had decided the works were non-urgent and complex they should have been completed within 180 working days. This means the works should have been completed by June 2025 at the latest. The Council has still not completed the works over a year later and does not anticipate doing so until at least August 2026.
27. Delays of this nature are clearly unacceptable and amount to fault.
28. The Council’s communication with Miss X was poor and also amounts to fault. The documents do not show that Miss X was routinely updated or kept informed of the progress of the DFG application.
29. Having identified fault I must consider whether this has caused Mrs X an injustice. Mrs X is currently unable to leave her home independently so is unable to access the community or her car by herself. Converting the window into a door will mean that Mrs X is able to access the community with ease.
30. Our guidance on remedies say that where someone has been deprived of adaptations which would have increased their independence and improved their daily life we recommend a remedy of £150 to £350 per month. The exact payment depends on a person’s situation and the impact on them.
31. In the circumstances I consider the Council should pay Mrs X £200 per month for the delay from June 2025.

Back to top

Action

32. Within one month of the decision the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Mrs X for the delays and poor communication and the distress and difficulties they caused her. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Pay Mrs X £2,600 for the avoidable distress, difficulties and uncertainty caused by the Council’s delays between June 2025 and July 2026.
• Make an ongoing payment to Mrs X of £200 per month until the works are complete, up to a maximum of six months after my final decision.
33. Within three months of the decision the Council will:
• Review its process for implementing adaptations recommended by a DFG assessment, against the timeframes in which it should be delivering those adaptations. It should ensure it has a process which complies with the timeframes in which it should be acting.
• Remind all relevant staff of the timeframe within which this process should be completed.
34. The Council provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

35. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman