Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained the Council signed off installation works of a specialist electrical bath for their child without getting an electrical safety certificate from the contractors. Mr and Mrs X also complained the Council installed the incorrect bath. We found fault with the Council failing to get the correct electrical safety certificate and for delays in making this safe. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr and Mrs X and pay them £500 for the avoidable distress and inconvenience caused. We did not find fault with the Council’s installation of the bath or later changing this to a wet-room.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X said the Council employed contractors to install a specialist electrical bath for their child in September 2021 to meet their child’s complex needs.
2. Mr and Mrs X complained the Council signed off the works without getting an electrical safety certificate from the contractors.
3. Mr and Mrs X also complained the Council installed the incorrect bath (an adult size bath) which has not been suitable for their child’s needs.
4. Mr and Mrs X say because of the Council’s actions, their child has been left without bathing facilities meaning they have had to wash their child with puppy pads on the lounge floor.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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)
6. 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)
7. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
8. 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(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

9. I have investigated all matters in this complaint since September 2021. This includes all matters about sourcing and installation of the bath. I have exercised my discretion to investigate matters back to this date as this relates to the injustice complained about.
10. I have not investigated any matters before September 2021. A complaint about matters such as potential delays in installation of the bath are the subject of a separate complaint and separate injustice. These matters occurred more than 12 months back from when Mr and Mrs X complained to us about the Council. There is no good reason to investigate these matters now.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I have considered all the information Mr and Mrs X provided. I have also asked the Council questions and requested information, and in turn have considered the Council’s response.
12. Both Mr and Mrs X and the Council had opportunity to comment on my draft decision before I made my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Disabled Facilities Grant

13. Under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, councils can award Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG) to people whose disability means their home needs adaptation. If the person applying meets the qualifying criteria the council must award the grant.
14. Councils only approve grants for work they decide is necessary. An occupational therapist usually assesses need. Where a borough council is responsible for DFGs, the occupational therapist may work for a county council. Borough and county councils should work together to provide a well-coordinated DFG service.
15. The maximum amount of mandatory grant is £30,000. Grants for children are not means-tested. Councils can decide to give more help if they think it is necessary.
16. The guidance also says other charges incurred as part of the works are eligible for grant funding such as architects’ and surveyors’ fees and charges for planning permission or building regulations approval.
17. A council must decide if the proposed works are necessary and appropriate to meet the needs of the disabled person. It must also be satisfied it is reasonable and practicable to carry out the works given the condition of the property to be adapted. In cases where major adaptations are required and it is difficult to provide a cost-effective solution, councils may consider the possibility of supporting a person to move to a more suitable home.

What happened

18. In 2021 a council Occupational Therapist assessed that Mr and Mrs X’s child, who I shall refer to as Y, would benefit from installation of a specialist bath to meet her bathing needs. The Occupational Therapist provided a quote to the Council naming a specific model of bath, Model 1, with a supportive bath seat and recommended installation.
19. The Council agreed to the recommendation and ordered the Model 1 bath with the supportive bath seat.
20. In September 2021, the Council arranged for an electrical contractor to install an electricity supply for the bath before installation. The electrical contractor completed the works but did not provide an installation report or certification. The electrical contractor did provide a photograph to the Council showing installation of the fused spur box which was fully intact on installation.
21. Following the electrical contractor’s work, the Council arranged for installation of the Model 1 bath. A council officer attending the property in November 2021 and signed off the installation and confirmed payment to the electrical contractor.
22. On 25 October 2022, Mr and Mrs X contacted the Council about concerns over the installation works of the bath. Mr and Mrs X expressed concerns about the safety of the electrics and issues with the hoists. Mr and Mrs X did not raise concerns about the bath itself at this time.
23. The Council offered for the electrical contractors to come out to the inspect the works but Mr and Mrs X declined the offer.
24. In January 2023, Mr and Mrs X arranged for an independent bath representative to attend their property. The bath representative advised Mr and Mrs X should install one of their baths and raised concerns about the suitability of the bath installed. The representative also raised concerns about the safety of the electrical installation. Mr and Mrs X passed the bath representatives comments to the Council.
25. The Occupational Therapist attended the property and discussed the bath situation with Mr and Mrs X. The Occupational Therapist recommended replacement of the bath to the Council in March 2023. The Council accepted the recommendation and ordered the new bath in June 2023.
26. On 16 July 2023, Mr and Mrs X contacted the Council to advise they no longer wanted installation of the bath. Mr and Mrs X said this was because they believed Y would never have a bath again because of traumatic experiences with having baths. Mr and Mrs X sought installation of a wet-room instead. Mr and Mrs X said they would not be using the bath again.
27. On 19 July 2023, Mr and Mrs X told the Council they had arranged for a private electrician to inspect the electrical installation who deemed it unsafe.
28. The Council arranged for their own electrician to attend the property who made safe the works on 26 July 2023 by disconnecting the bath. The electrician’s report confirmed:
• The fused spur had access through a top entry hole which presented a risk to injury and present danger.
• The fused spur was not fitted correctly and while it did not present a present danger, improvement was recommended.
• The flexible white conduit was not fixed correctly and while it did not present a present danger, improvement was recommended.
29. Mr and Mrs X complained to the Council on 27 July 2023.
30. The Council provided a Stage 1 complaint response on 9 August 2023. The Council said:
• The electrical contractors who completed the pre-installation works for the bath provided photographs of the completed works but did not provide an electrical installation certificate. The Council accepted it was at fault for failing to comply with regulations.
• The bath installers fitted the bath correctly and provided a commissioning certificate for this work.
• Its officer signed off the full works but should not have signed off the electrical works without the certificate.
• The photograph showed the electrical spur was fitted correctly and it had no way of knowing when it became disturbed. The Council said it had no evidence its officer signed off the works in a dangerous state.
• Following Mr and Mrs X’s contact in October 2022 it tried to correct the works in November 2022 but Mr and Mrs X said they did not want further contractors coming out.
• Mr and Mrs X did not contact about the electrical installation again until July 2023 when it responded quickly to make the electrics safe.
31. Following Mr and Mrs X’s complaint, the Council reviewed its process for installation and certification of electrical work installations.
32. On 17 August 2023, the Occupational Therapist recommended installation of a wet-room into Mr and Mrs X’s property. The Council designed plans for the wet-room while liaising with the Occupational Therapist over Y’s needs.
33. Mr and Mrs X responded to the Council’s complaint response on 24 August 2023. Mr and Mrs X said they were not happy the Council failed to get an electrical installation certificate and said the dangerous electrics could have killed them. Mr and Mrs X said they contacted the Council about this matter in October 2022 and not July 2023.
34. On 4 October 2023, the Council sent the proposed new bathroom layout to Mr and Mrs X to be signed off. Mr and Mrs X agreed to this installation. The Council completed the installation by 13 October 2023.
35. On 10 October 2023, the Council provided its Stage 2 complaint response. The Council said:
• It apologised for failing to act in response to Mr and Mrs X’s concerns about the electrical safety sooner.
• It accepted fault for failing to get an electrical safety certificate from the electricians.
• It was clear from the photograph the spur was installed without access but that by January 2023 the electrical spur was unsafe.
• Following contact with the electricians and NICEIC the Council confirmed there was a difference in professional opinion but subject to the unit being closed up it may be compliant with regulations.
• It accepted it failed to act on the electrical installation issues since January 2023.

Analysis

Electrical installation works

36. The Council should have got an electrical safety certificate from the electrical contractor following installation of the electrical works in September 2021. The Council has already accepted fault for this matter.
37. Since the Council did not get an electrical safety certificate from the electrical contractors, it is not possible to be confident if the electrical installation was safe and compliant in September 2021. While the photograph from the electrician shows the installation may have been safe, the failure of the Council to get the certificate from the electrical contractors means the Council cannot know if this was the case. The Council compounded this error by its officer failing to make suitable notes of their visit in November 2021 when they signed off the installation.
38. The Council failed to take suitable steps to verify the safety of the electrical installation in 2021. This was fault.
39. The Council has already taken steps to improve its processes for signing off similar installations. I am satisfied the Council has taken suitable service improvements to try to prevent a reoccurrence of this situation. While the Council has taken steps to prevent a reoccurrence, this does not address the injustice in this matter.
40. While the electrical installation was deemed unsafe, none of Mr X, Mrs X or Y came to any harm because of the electrical installation. This means the only injustice to Mr and Mrs X was the distress and worry caused through the unsafe electrical installation.
41. Mr and Mrs X raised their first concerns about the electrical installation with the Council in October 2022. Seemingly Mr and Mrs X were unaware of the unsafe electrical installation before October 2022 so there was no injustice to them before this date. The Council offered to attend the property to inspect any issues but Mr and Mrs X declined this offer. I cannot find the Council at fault for this.
42. However, following Mr and Mrs X’s contact in January 2023, which included professional concerns from the bath representative about the electrical installation, the Council failed to act until July 2023. The Council only acted in July 2023 in response to a further contact from Mr and Mrs X with a report from a private electrician.
43. The Council’s failure to act from January 2023 to July 2023 was fault. This fault would have caused Mr and Mrs X avoidable distress and worry about the safety of the electrical installation in their property. The Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies says where we decide it is appropriate, we will normally recommend a remedy payment for distress and uncertainty of up to £500. In this instance, the Council’s failure to act for seven months will have caused Mr and Mrs X a high amount of distress and uncertainty given the dangerous nature of electrical installation. We recommend the Council pays Mr and Mrs X £500 for this fault.

Bath installation

44. Mr and Mrs X complained the Council installed an incorrect bath in 2021 which was not suitable for Y’s needs.
45. The Council Occupational Therapist completed an assessment of Y and decided she needed a specialist bath. Following the Occupational Therapist’s assessment they decided the Model 1 bath was suitable for Y’s needs. The Occupational Therapist got a quote for this bath and recommended this to the Council. The Council ordered and installed this Model 1 bath in line with the Occupational Therapist’s recommendations.
46. The Ombudsman would not question the professional opinion of an Occupational Therapist unless there is clear evidence of fault. The bath recommended by the Occupational Therapist could have been suitable for Y’s needs and there is no clear evidence that recommending this bath was inappropriate for Y before its installation. While the bath representative in January 2023 may have considered a different bath was more suitable for Y, this is simply a difference in professional opinion.
47. I do not find fault with the Council installing the Model 1 bath in September 2021.

Changing the bath installation

48. Mr and Mrs X were in contact with the Council at various points from September 2021 until January 2023. However, Mr and Mrs X first mentioned the unsuitability of the bath for Y in January 2023.
49. When Mr and Mrs X contacted the Council in January 2023 about their concerns for Y’s safety with the bath, the Council arranged for an Occupational Therapist to visit the property. Following a further assessment by the Occupational Therapist, they recommended replacement of the bath for a different specialist bath. The Council agreed to this bath replacement and ordered the new bath.
50. The Council took suitable steps to address Mr and Mrs X’s concerns about the unsuitability of the bath following their contact in January 2023. The Council agreed with the Occupational Therapist’s recommendations and started the process of replacing the bath. The Council could not have acted before Mr and Mrs X contacted it to raise concerns about the suitability of the bath in January 2023. I do not find fault with the Council.
51. The Council did not install the bath in July 2023 because of contact from Mr and Mrs X. Mr and Mrs X specifically advised the Council that Y could no longer have baths without experiencing trauma. Mr and Mrs X asked the Council to install a wet-room. The Council took suitable steps to install a wet-room rather than replace the bath in line with Mr and Mrs X’s request. I do not find fault with the Council taking this course of action.
52. Following the Council deciding to install a wet-room, it designed the wet-room with input from the Occupational Therapist and agreed final sign-off with Mr and Mrs X of the plans before proceeding with the installation. The Council has taken on board suitable professional opinion and got Mr and Mrs X’s acceptance of the proposed works. The Council has taken suitable steps to design and put in place this wet-room and I do not find fault.

Back to top

Agreed action

53. Within one month of the Ombudsman’s final decision the Council should:
• Apologise to Mr and Mrs X and pay them £500 for the delays in acting on concerns about the safety of the electrical installation.
54. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

55. There was fault by the Council as the Council has agreed to my recommendations, I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman