Summary: A homeowner complained that the Council unreasonably ended a scheme to fund free home insulation works after an energy company had told him he would qualify for the scheme. But the Ombudsman has no reason to investigate this matter because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr C, complained that the Council unreasonably ended a scheme for funding insulation works for homeowners after an energy company it was in partnership with had told him he was entitled to a 100% grant for works at his property. Mr C felt he was being treated unfairly and must qualify for help with insulation under one of the schemes offered by the Council.

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

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information Mr C provided about his complaint and his comments when we spoke on the telephone. I also gave Mr C an opportunity to comment on this draft decision before I reached a final view in his case. In addition I considered the Council’s response to my enquiries about Mr C’s complaint.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr C owns a house with a concrete construction. Mr C has a serious medical condition which means he has to keep his home well heated. However he says the house is poorly insulated so his heating bills are very high. Mr C says external wall insulation should be installed to improve the energy efficiency of his property and reduce his fuel costs.
5. Mr C has made several approaches to the Council for help in insulating his house in recent years. But the Council found that Mr C was not eligible for assistance under the home insulation schemes it offered or had access to.
6. In particular the Council participates in a scheme providing free insulation and other energy saving measures, which is funded by an energy company under the Energy Company Obligation (ECO). The ECO was introduced by the Government to require energy suppliers to improve domestic energy efficiency and reduce fuel poverty. But Mr C was not eligible as the scheme in the Council’s area did not include external wall insulation.
7. The Council also offers a discretionary Warm and Safer Homes (WASH) grant where a private property does not meet minimum housing standards, including in respect of thermal comfort. But Mr C was not eligible for a WASH grant as there were no qualifying category 1 hazards at his property and, in any case, his household’s income was above the threshold for assistance.
8. Mr C complained to the Ombudsman last year about the Council’s refusal of assistance under these schemes. But we decided not to pursue Mr C’s complaint as there was no sign of fault in the Council’s decisions in his case.
9. Mr C said he contacted the energy company again around the end of last year and they told him that grants for the insulation works he wanted were available. Mr C said the energy company assessed his property in the New Year and they subsequently told him that he qualified for a 100% grant for external wall insulation.
10. But Mr C said when he contacted the energy company a few weeks later he was told the Council had withdrawn funding for the works. In addition, the team dealing with this matter at the company had been disbanded. Mr C then complained again to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Analysis

11. But I consider we do not have reason to start an investigation of Mr C’s complaint.
12. In particular, the Council does not share Mr C’s interpretation of recent events in his case. The Council said it had not provided any additional external wall insulation schemes, or extended the previous scheme, since Mr C’s last complaint to the Ombudsman. So he has not become eligible for any funding for external wall insulation from the Council. In the circumstances the Council suggested Mr C should take up his concerns with the energy company.
13. I have not seen evidence to suggest the Council has given any commitment to assist Mr C with the cost of insulation since his previous complaint to us, or that it has changed any funding arrangements regarding insulation works in that time which would make him eligible for assistance. As a result I am not convinced there is any sign of fault on the Council’s part.
14. In addition, it appears the queries Mr C has raised about his eligibility for a WASH grant and assistance under the ECO funded scheme are essentially the same as those he raised in his original complaint to us. The Council has confirmed there have been no changes in either scheme that since then, and I am not aware of any relevant changes in Mr C’s circumstances in that time which would affect his eligibility. We would normally not look again at matters we have already considered in a previous complaint. So as it stands, I see no reason to reconsider these issues in Mr C’s case.

Back to top

Final decision

15. Mr C complained the Council unreasonably ended a scheme to fund home insulation works after an energy company had told him he would qualify for the scheme. But the Ombudsman does not have reason to investigate Mr C’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council regarding the matters in question.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman