Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on modifications to a property. This is because Mr X complained about this under the three stage children’s act complaint procedures and the Council has not completed all three stages of that procedure. It would now be reasonable for Mr X to complete that procedure. Nor will we investigate the delays in the Council’s consideration of the complaint under that procedure, because we are satisfied the Council has agreed to provide an appropriate remedy for Mr X’s injustice caused by delays.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to carry out a loft conversion which had been agreed in 2023 to make his home suitable for two further children under a special guardianship order. He said that this has caused overcrowding, stress, and deterioration in his family’s health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X said, the Council agreed to the loft extension in 2023 as part of a special guardianship agreement. However, they later learnt that costs of the works had increased significantly and exceeded the available budget. Therefore, it offered a financial contribution towards alternative housing options instead.
7. Mr X was unhappy with this decision and made a complaint. The Council accepted the Complaint under the statutory children’s complaint procedure. It has completed its stage one and stage two investigations.
8. The statutory complaints process included a third stage, an independent review panel. Given the statutory complaint process is not yet complete, it would be reasonable to expect Mr X to proceed through the three stages and request a stage three review if he is dissatisfied with the Council’s stage two response. Therefore, we will not investigate the substantive issues he has raised with us.
9. The Council delayed completing the stage two investigation in line with the regulations, by three months. It has now concluded this stage and has proposed paying Mr X a symbolic financial remedy of £150 to address Mr X’s injustice. This is in line with our guidance and therefore we will not investigate a complaint about delays.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X complaint because it would be reasonable to expect him to have asked for Stage three panel review and complete the process. Additionally, we will not investigate the delays as the Council has agreed to provide an appropriate remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman