Derbyshire County Council (18 015 862)

Category : Housing > Private housing

Decision : Upheld

Decision date : 28 Nov 2019

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr X complains about unsatisfactory works carried out at his property under the Council’s Healthy Homes programme. He also complains the Council has discriminated against him, as well as bullied and harassed him. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for the poor standard of work completed and for not responding to Mr X’s complaint about bullying, harassment and discrimination in a timely manner. We have made recommendations.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains about unsatisfactory works carried out at his property under the Council’s Healthy Homes programme. Mr X also complains the Council has discriminated against him, as well as bullied and harassed him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
  2. If we are satisfied with a council’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

How I considered this complaint

  1. I spoke with Mr X and considered the information he provided.
  2. I spoke with the Council and considered the information it provided.
  3. I sent a draft decision to Mr X and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Background

  1. Mr X has Asperger’s. His social worker referred him to the Council’s Healthy Home programme.
  2. The Health Home programme provides interventions to help vulnerable residents keep warm and well at home. Mr X said he originally wanted his boiler replaced but was persuaded to have a new central heating system put in.
  3. Mr X said the Council did not provide him with any paperwork, so he was unaware of what to expect or how the process worked. The Council said it could have been clearer with Mr X on what to expect.

What happened

  1. In March 2017, the contractors started work to replace Mr X’s central heating system. Mr X said the contractors told him his radiators needed to be replaced. Mr X said he told the contractor he wanted his replacement radiators to be normal size, but the contractor installed oversized radiators.
  2. Mr X said the contractor caused damaged to his kitchen units, broke his toilet, and damaged his carpets. He also said the new boiler leaked which caused his ceiling to collapse and caused damage to his dining room furniture.
  3. Mr X said the contractor did complete some remedial work, such as painting damaged walls. However, Mr X said the work was of poor quality. Mr X said it took the Council a year to replace his carpets and took four months to fix his toilet.
  4. In April 2019, the Council visited Mr X’s property to inspect the work carried out. The Council noted the following:
  • Front lobby – Poor plastering, paint on the window frame and paint peeling off the walls. Two cracked terracotta floor tiles under the front door mat. Broken lock in internal front door.
  • Hall/stairs/landing – Poor plastering and paintwork. Paint splashed on bookcase, windowsills, and light switch and fittings.
  • Kitchen – broken kitchen plinth, lights no longer working
  • Dining room – Ceiling damaged from leak, poor plastering and decorating, paint damage to rugs, floor, and window frames. Poor pipe fitting around the radiator and damage to dining room table.
  • Lounge – Poor plastering and decorating. Window frames paint damaged. Radiator fitted in different place.
  • Bathroom – Oversized radiator fitted.
  • Main bedroom – Large damp patches. Poor plastering and decorating. Paint damage and poorly finished repair to ceiling.
  • Back bedroom – Poor painting and paint damage
  • Box room – Badly installed pipework after replacing the oversized radiator. Painting done in patches. Paint damage
  • Garage – two large radiators fitted even though Mr X did not want them.
  • Keys to garage missing.
  1. The Council has offered Mr X an independent advocate to help support him with the necessary remedial works at his property. Mr X said the Council has only offered him an advocate from the Asperger’s society. Mr X said he wants an advocate who has some knowledge about buildings. He also wants the Council to appoint a solicitor to negotiate compensation and the remedial works on his behalf. Mr X said an advocate cannot do this. Mr X said he could no longer deal with the issue as the matter was causing him anxiety and stress.
  2. The Council said it would complete the following to resolve Mr X’s complaint:
  • Arrange for a surveyor to inspect Mr X’s property. Council said once this was done, it could decide what work needs doing and prepare a schedule of work.
  • Arrange for a social worker to assess Mr X to identify any further needs. The Council will also ask the social worker to investigate Mr X’s allegations of bullying and harassment.
  • Offer Mr X a financial payment once the matter has been finalised and the remedial works completed.

Analysis

  1. The evidence suggests the Council has accepted the works completed were of a poor standard. This is fault.
  2. Further, Mr X has made allegations of bullying, harassment, and discrimination. The Council said it wanted to first appoint Mr X a social worker and then ask the social worker to investigate the allegations. The Council has not investigated these allegations yet as it has not assigned Mr X a social worker.
  3. It is not for the Ombudsman to dictate to the Council how it should investigate complaints. However, the Council has not investigated this part of Mr X’s complaint in a timely manner. This is fault.
  4. I find the faults identified caused Mr X avoidable distress and frustration. Mr X should also have received a timely complaint response from the Council. Mr X was inconvenienced because of the time and trouble taken to pursue his complaint with the Council. This prolonged the distress caused.
  5. The Council has offered to put things right. It has offered to arrange for a surveyor to attend Mr X’s property to inspect the damage. The Council said it would arrange for remedial works to start after this. The Council has offered Mr X an independent advocate to support him through the process. The Council has also confirmed it will offer Mr X a financial payment to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to him.
  6. Mr X wants the Council to appoint a solicitor to act on his behalf. Mr X says he cannot deal with the matter himself and needs someone to negotiate the remedial works and financial payment on his behalf.
  7. I find the Council’s remedy proposal to be appropriate. The fault identified was poor standard of work. Therefore, it is appropriate for the Council to offer to send a surveyor to inspect Mr X’s property. This will ensure all damage is recorded and help the Council find out what remedial works are needed to fix the damage.
  8. I understand Mr X says he needs support with the negotiation when it comes to agreeing what works should take place. However, an advocate would be suitable for this role as they can discuss with Mr X what he wants and support him to put these wishes across to the Council. An advocate can also speak to the Council on his behalf should Mr X find it too stressful. It is not necessary for someone to be legally trained to represent Mr X’s wishes.
  9. Finally, Mr X said he did not receive any paperwork prior to work commencing. He said this meant he did not know what to expect or what work would be completed. The Council accepted it could have been clearer with Mr X.
  10. The Healthy Homes programme is in place to help vulnerable people. Given this, it is important the Council is clear with applicants what they can expect from the scheme and what work will be completed. This will ensure all parties are clear from the outset what the programme will provide and what work will be completed. This also allows applicants to make an informed decision about whether they want to go ahead with the scheme.
  11. I find the Council was at fault for not providing Mr X with relevant information about the scheme, and what to expect, at the beginning of the process. This caused Mr X distress and frustration.

Agreed action

  1. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, the Council has greed to complete the following.

Personal remedy:

  • Investigate Mr X’s allegations of bullying, harassment, and discrimination. It is for the Council to decide how to investigate this complaint, but the Council should ensure it provides a response within 28 calendar days. This is in line with its corporate complaints procedure.
  • Arrange for an appropriate surveyor to inspect the quality of the work completed to Mr X’s property. The surveyor should also consider the damage Mr X said was caused to his property and furnishings. The Council should shortlist three surveyors (at least two should be independent of the Council) and send the details to Mr X. Mr X will choose his preferred surveyor out of the shortlist.
  • Arrange for an independent advocate to support Mr X. The Council should shortlist three advocacy services and send the details to Mr X. Mr X will choose his preferred advocacy service out of the shortlist.
  1. The Council should complete the above within four weeks of the final decision
  • Consider making a financial payment to Mr X once it has completed the remedial works to a satisfactory standard. The Council should consider the injustice caused by the faults identified and the time taken to resolve Mr X’s complaint.
  1. The Council should provide the Ombudsman with an update on the above remedy within three months of the final decision.

Service improvement:

  • The Council should complete a review of its procedures for the Healthy Homes programme. The Council will consider if it can improve the information it provides at the start of the process so it is clearer to applicants what they can expect from the scheme. The Council could consider creating an information leaflet which details the process.
  1. The Council should complete the above within three months of the final decision. The Council should report to the Ombudsman with the results of its review and explain if it will be making any improvements. If the Council will not be making any improvements, the Council should explain its reasons why.
  2. The Council should complete the remedial works within six months of the date the works are agreed, unless there are good reasons for it not being able to.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I find fault with the Council for the poor standard of work completed and for not responding to Mr X’s complaint about bullying, harassment and discrimination in a timely manner. I also find fault with the Council for not providing Mr X with relevant information about the programme, and what to expect, at the beginning of the process. The Council has accepted my recommendations and I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings