Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award a Disabled Facilities Grant to convert the loft into a bedroom. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains that the Council has not awarded a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) for all the work he thinks should be done to meet the needs of his disabled son. In particular he wants a DFG to convert the loft into a bedroom and put fencing all around the house.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I considered additional evidence Mr X provided in response to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Disabled Facilities Grant

4. A council can award a DFG to help a disabled person make changes to their home. The work must be necessary and appropriate to meet the needs of the disabled person.

What happened

5. Mr X owns his home. He lives with his wife and three sons in a house with three double bedrooms. One child (A) has significant disabilities and it is accepted he needs his own bedroom and a secure play area.
6. Mr X applied for a DFG. The main reason for the application was to convert the loft into a bedroom. Child A had tried sharing a room but this had caused problems. When the Council assessed the DFG application child A had his own room and another son had a mattress in the living room. Mr X feels it is important that each of his sons have their own room, especially as the two brothers have been used to having their own rooms.
7. The Council awarded a DFG to fund some adaptations in the bathroom and to provide fencing to make an area in the back garden secure for child A. Mr X wanted the Council to also secure the area to the front and side of the house.
8. In response to his complaint the Council said it would not fund a loft conversion because the house is large enough for child A to have his own room providing his two brothers share. The Council said it was common for siblings to share and it is for the family to decide how to organise the space it has. The Council also said it was sufficient to fence off part of the garden to provide a safe outside space for child A.

Assessment

9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The rules say that a DFG must be to fund changes that are necessary and appropriate to meet the needs of the disabled person. It is not necessary for the loft to be converted because child A can have his own room if his brothers share. I appreciate Mr X may want his sons to all have their own room but this is not what a DFG is designed to fund. In addition, if child A did not have a disability, the family would still be in the same position of needing an extra bedroom if all three sons were to have their own room.
10. In addition, the fencing in the back garden will allow child A to have access to a safe outdoor space but it is not necessary for the Council to pay for the whole garden area to be secured.
11. I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision but the Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body. He cannot intervene simply because a council makes a decision that someone disagrees with.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman