Summary: We have discontinued our investigation into Mr X’s complaint about how the Council made adaptations to his property. This is because most of Mr X’s complaint is outside our jurisdiction, and the parts of complaint we could consider do not warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that

• The Council has failed to carry out suitable adaptations to his property,
• The Council has discriminated against him and his disabilities by failing to provide a safe property for him,
• That Council officers have interfered with works to make his property safe and behaved aggressively towards him,
• That work to the property carried out by the Council was of poor quality and caused injury to him, and
• The Council has failed to have due regard to its duties under the Equality Act when carrying out the adaptations to his property.

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. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
4. 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)
5. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or if there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
6. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. Part of Mr X’s complaint is that some of the work completed by the Council to his property has been of poor quality. He says this negligence by the Council has caused him personal injury. Deciding about whether an organisation has been negligent usually involves looking rigorously, and in a structured way at evidence as only the court can to make its findings. In addition, only a court can decide if an organisation has been negligent and so should pay damages. We cannot recommend actions or payments that ‘punish’ the organisation.
9. I cannot decide whether an organisation has been negligent and have no powers to enforce an award of damages. I consider it is reasonable to expect Mr X to use or to have used the court if he believes the Council’s actions amount to negligence causing personal injury.
10. Part of Mr X’s complaint is about adaptations that were to be made when he lived with his sister. I am not investigating this part of the complaint as Mr X was not a tenant of the property. His sister has capacity to make a complaint in her own right if she so wishes to.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council, as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
12. I invited Mr X and the Council to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before issuing a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

13. Mr X has several disabilities which mean that any property he lives in likely needs adaptations. Mr X was previously homeless and living with his sister. He made a homelessness application to the Council, and the Council offered him a property.
14. Mr X said he could not accept the property until he knew that it could be suitably adapted to meet his needs.
15. The Council arranged for adaptations to be made to Mr X’s property both before and after he moved in. It did this in its capacity as Mr X’s landlord, as Mr X did not consent to a disabled facilities grant.

Analysis

16. I am discontinuing the investigation into this complaint.
17. Mr X’s complaint centres around the way the Council has made decisions about the management of his property and carrying out adaptations to his property in its capacity as his social landlord. We have no jurisdiction to investigate such complaints. Such matters are for the Housing Ombudsman. It is reasonable for Mr X to raise the matter with them.
18. We are unlikely to reach a view on Mr X’s complaint about in person officer conduct as there is no way of knowing what happened, and this does not warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Decision

19. I am discontinuing my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman