Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not making adaptations to his property in line with the recommendations of an occupational therapist. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council had not followed up on recommendations made by an occupational therapist, which means his property has not been adapted to meet his disability needs.
2. Mr X also complained the Council was communicating with him directly despite there being a court order in place directing it to communicate with Ms Y due to Mr X’s disabilities.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X said, when he agreed to move to his current Council property, this council, Council A, had assured him it would be adapted to meet his disability needs. He said that, despite an occupational therapist (OT) making recommendations, the adaptations he needs have not been made.
7. Mr X provided a letter sent to him by another council, Council B, which confirmed an OT assessment considered various adaptations, including lowering door handles and electric sockets, a lower toilet and levelling of the outside space to make it wheelchair accessible.
8. Council B said Council A had considered the OT’s recommendations in April 2023, but had not agreed to make adaptations because it needed more information. It asked Council B for a further assessment from an adult care OT.
9. In September 2023, Council B contacted Ms Y about the assessment and, after discussing it with Mr X, she said Mr X did not want to proceed with a further assessment. Therefore, Council B did not send any further information to Council A. Council B said it would rearrange the assessment following Mr X’s contact.

My assessment

10. Council A was not able to proceed with the adaptations the OT recommended in 2023 because it needed more information. Since Mr X did not agree to a further assessment at that time, Council A was not able to proceed with the adaptations.
11. We will not investigate the complaint further because there is insufficient evidence of fault by Council A to justify our involvement.
12. Mr X also complained Council A was communicating with him directly rather than through Ms Y. Council A confirmed it had written instructions to share information with Ms Y. However, I note from the records I have seen that Mr X frequently contacts Council A directly and its responds directly to him. Whilst this would not amount to fault, it would be helpful for Council A to clarify with Mr X how he wants it to communicate with him going forward.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to adapt his property in line with OT recommendations because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman