Summary: Mr B says an organisation employed by the Council failed to complete gas works at his property and the Council unreasonably refused to pursue the delay issues or share information with him. There was some delay progressing Mr B’s application for energy improvements but there is no fault in the Council’s consideration of whether to pursue a complaint with the organisation or in the information provided to him. An apology and payment to Mr B is satisfactory remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr B, complained the Council:
• failed to ensure an organisation acting on its behalf to deliver energy improvements completed gas works to ensure he could take advantage of the grant scheme;
• refused to share with him the Council’s contract with the organisation;
• refused to provide evidence he will not be charged for the installation of a gas pipe; and
• refused to pursue the delay issues with the organisation.
2. Mr B says as a result he is left with inefficient electric storage heaters and will have to pay for installation of central heating at his own expense.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a Council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), as amended)
4. 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)
5. 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)
6. 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

How I considered this complaint

7. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and Mr B's comments;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
8. Mr B and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

Ofgem guidance

9. An energy efficiency scheme for Great Britain that places legal obligations on larger energy suppliers to deliver energy efficient measures to domestic premises was introduced in 2013. Mr B applied to the scheme known as ECO3 in April 2021. Phase 4 of that scheme ran for the period 1 April 2021-31 March 2022. The scheme covered replacement of broken heating systems, upgrade of inefficient heating systems and installation of insulation to reduce home heating costs for low income, fuel poor and vulnerable people.
10. The guidance made clear under ECO3 measures to reduce home heating costs for low income, vulnerable and fuel poor households could be delivered based on eligibility criteria. This included social housing with an EPC energy efficiency rating of E, F or G.
11. The local authority is responsible for determining whether a household is eligible.
12. The guidance sets out various preconditions which includes roof insulation and cavity wall insulation.
13. For electric storage heaters (ESH) the guidance says an assessment needs to be carried out to decide whether the ESH is broken down and whether it can be repaired or whether it should be replaced.

Government guidance on retrofitting dwellings for improved energy efficiency (PAS2035)

14. This describes the retrofit process required. It says following the preliminary considerations a dwelling assessment will take place, following which an improvement option and plan, followed by a design, will be completed.
15. Not all projects will have a main contractor but all projects should have a retrofit installer.
16. When a retrofit plan is formulated the most cost-effective approach is the one known as ‘fabric first’. This involves five stages which includes improving the building fabric by insulation measures. It says the existing building fabric should be as energy efficient as possible before spending resources on other measures.
17. Before the retrofit design is started the retrofit coordinator shall carry out an improvement options evaluation to identify an appropriate package.

What happened

18. An organisation (the organisation) acted on behalf of the Council to deliver energy improvements as part of a partnership agreement. Its role was to manage the funding available, assess grant applications for eligibility, assess the property for eligibility and viable/possible works, coordinate technical inspections, produce energy plans and recommendations, coordinate works with approved suppliers and undertake quality audits.
19. Mr B applied for energy improvements at his property in April 2021. The organisation emailed Mr B to acknowledge receipt of his application for a grant and to explain the next steps and the limitations of the scheme. The organisation then carried out a risk assessment, checked whether Mr B lived in a conservation area and checked gas connections in the locality. The organisation had completed those steps by June 2021.
20. In August 2021 the organisation contacted Mr B to arrange a whole house assessment. That took place on 1 September. That assessment identified possible energy efficiency measures which included cavity wall insulation, loft insulation and first-time central heating. Those measures were dependent on a preinstallation technical inspection and available funding.
21. The organisation requested a gas connection proposal from another organisation and told Mr B he needed to get the freeholder’s agreement for the work to take place. Mr B provided the organisation with evidence of consent from the freeholder on 3 December.
22. Mr B chased the organisation for progress on 15 December. The organisation told Mr B before central heating works could take place insulation works were required. The organisation explained a preinstallation technical inspection was required but could not take place until it had identified a contractor.
23. The organisation identified a contractor in January 2022. However, the inspection was further delayed because the contractor had COVID-19.
24. Mr B had a gas pipe installed at the end of January 2022.
25. The organisation chased the contractor for another date for the inspection in February 2022. The inspection was then booked for 1 March. The organisation explained this insulation inspection was required before an inspection could take place for the central heating.
26. On 10 March the organisation told Mr B it did not have any heating engineers available to undertake the inspection for heating. The organisation advised Mr B to get a gas meter installed as soon as possible as funding was changing on 1 April. That funding change meant a gas meter needed to be installed by then to comply with the funding regime.
27. Mr B told the organisation it was too short notice to get a gas meter installed. Mr B also said he was not comfortable doing that when he did not have a boiler or radiator installed as he would then have to pay the standing charge.
28. On 7 April the organisation told Mr B funding had expired at the end of March 2022. The organisation says it tried to identify alternative funding sources but was unsuccessful.
29. Mr B put in a complaint to the organisation. The organisation told Mr B its role was to provide the grant but it depended on the supply chain to carry out the installation works and the supply chain had been under significant pressure due to the impact of COVID-19 and Brexit.
30. The organisation contacted Mr B again at the end of May 2022 to say additional funding might be available if he had a gas meter installed as soon as possible. I understand Mr B was on holiday at the time and by the time he contacted the organisation on 21 June the funding had run out.
31. Mr B contacted the Council in November 2022 to raise concerns about what had happened. Following that Mr B asked the Council to raise a formal complaint with the organisation. The Council obtained some details from the organisation on 18 April. That satisfied the Council and it told Mr B it would not raise a complaint with the organisation.
32. Mr B asked the Council to send him a copy of the agreement it had with the organisation. Mr B also asked the Council to clarify whether he would be liable for the £2,000 connection charge if he did not go down the gas connection route and instead had a heat pump installed. He also asked the Council to raise a complaint with the organisation due to the delays. In response the Council told Mr B he was not liable for the £2,000 charge.

Analysis

33. Mr B says the Council failed to ensure the organisation, acting on its behalf to deliver energy improvements, completed gas works to ensure he could take advantage of the grant scheme. The first point to make here is that the application Mr B submitted was for energy efficiency improvements. The role of the organisation acting on behalf of the Council was to assess the application and determine what energy efficiency improvements were necessary and then to arrange for a third party to complete those improvements. What that means is the organisation acting on behalf of the Council was not responsible for carrying out works at Mr B’s property. Whether those works would include installation of a new central heating system was also not guaranteed as that depended on the assessment.
34. The evidence I have seen satisfies me Mr B put in his application for energy efficiency improvements in April 2021. I am satisfied there were delays carrying out action on the application which delayed the whole house assessment. I appreciate there was a backlog of applications at that point as the organisation had received more than 10,000 applications between March 2020 and March 2022 and some of its 45 employees had been furloughed or made redundant due to COVID-19. Nevertheless, delay processing the application is fault.
35. I am also satisfied there were further delays between the whole house assessment on 1 September 2021 and the insulation inspection in March 2022. The evidence I have seen satisfies me some of that delay was due to Mr B having to secure consent from the leaseholder. The evidence I have seen satisfies me the Council did not have that consent until December 2021. The delays after December 2021 were then due to the organisation being unable to identify available contractors and then the allocated contractor having COVID-19. Those delays were outside the control of the Council and are therefore not something I can criticise the Council for.
36. I appreciate from Mr B’s point of view he has suffered a significant injustice because he does not have the central heating he had applied for. As I said in the previous two paragraphs, there were delays in the process. I could not say though if those delays had not occurred Mr B would have had central heating installed before funding ran out. That was dependent on the outcome of the steps in the process which were not completed due to the process stalling in March 2022 when changes to the funding scheme meant Mr B needed to have a gas meter installed. In those circumstances I can only recommend a remedy to reflect Mr B’s uncertainty about whether the process would have been completed and central heating installed had delays not occurred.
37. In reaching that view I recognise Mr B has raised concerns about not being asked to install a gas meter at his property until it was too late to do so in 2022 before the scheme changed. The organisation says it told Mr B about the need to install a gas meter at the point at which it became aware of changes to the scheme. In any event, Mr B’s application was made under the ECO3 scheme and the organisation was assessing the works under that scheme which did not require a gas meter to be installed until later in the process. I do not criticise the Council for not ensuring Mr B knew about the changes to the scheme from April 2022 earlier because there would have been no way to know until March 2022 that the works could not be completed in time for the new scheme.
38. It is possible if Mr B had installed a gas meter when asked to do so in March 2022 the works could have been completed before funding ran out given funding was subsequently extended for a few weeks. However, I cannot speculate about that because it is also possible if Mr B had installed a gas meter it would not have made a difference as funding could still have run out. In addition, I recognise the lead in times meant Mr B may not have had time to have a gas meter installed anyway. I am satisfied though this was not due to fault by the Council.
39. As I could not say fault by the Council or the organisation acting on its behalf meant Mr B missed out on central heating I cannot recommend the Council now fund central heating at Mr B’s property. As I have explained, my view is there is uncertainty about whether the process could have been completed had the delays I have identified not occurred. To remedy that I recommended the Council apologise to Mr B and pay him £300. I do not make any recommendations for procedural remedies given this was a time-limited application process which has ended. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.
40. Mr B says the Council failed to share with him the Council’s contract with the organisation. The evidence I have seen satisfies me the Council had in place a partnership agreement with the organisation. It is not unusual for councils to keep contractual and commercial agreements confidential, although I have seen no evidence in the documentary records to confirm whether the Council considers the partnership agreement in this case confidential. However, Mr B says he now has a copy of the partnership agreement from his MP. I therefore see no reason to pursue this part of the complaint further.
41. Mr B says the Council refused to provide evidence to show he will not be charged for the installation of a gas pipe. Having considered the documentary evidence I am satisfied the Council has checked with the organisation and reassured Mr B he will not be charged for the installation of the gas pipe.
42. I have seen no evidence the Council has confirmed that with the company Mr B signed an acceptance form for to confirm installation of the gas pipe. However, having considered that document I am satisfied in accepting the arrangements for the gas pipe to be installed Mr B ticked to confirm he intended to install gas fuelled appliances within one year of the gas connection being agreed. Given that document includes the word ‘intended’ I am satisfied the information the Council has provided Mr B with is accurate. It is clear to me when Mr B arranged for the gas pipe installation he intended for gas fuelled appliances to be installed within one year. There is nothing in that document to suggest if gas appliances are not installed within one year Mr B has breached the agreement. I am therefore satisfied the information the Council has given Mr B about him not being liable for any charges is accurate based on the document Mr B signed.
43. I appreciate the Council has not provided Mr B with the evidence he seeks. However, as the Council has not liaised with the company that installed the gas pipe I cannot see there is any further information the Council could provide to Mr B. As I said in the previous paragraph, the evidence I have seen satisfies me the information the Council gave Mr B is accurate.
44. Mr B says the Council refused to pursue the delay issues with the organisation. I understand Mr B’s frustration because he has not had any central heating installed. However, it is not my role to comment on the merits of the Council’s decision unless I were satisfied there was fault in how the Council reached that decision. Given the Council reached its decision after obtaining evidence from Mr B and from the organisation I have no grounds to criticise it. I have also made clear in this statement the delays I have identified were in confirming Mr B’s eligibility at the outset and in relation to contractor delays. The latter was not something which was within the Council’s control.

Back to top

Agreed action

45. When a Council commissions another organisation to provide services on its behalf it remains responsible for those services and for the actions of the organisation providing them. So, although I found fault with the service of the organisation, I have made recommendations to the Council.
46. Within one month of my decision the Council should:
• apologise to Mr B for the uncertainty and frustration he experienced due to the faults identified in this decision. The Council may want to refer to the Ombudsman’s updated guidance on remedies, which sets out the standards we expect apologies to meet;
• pay Mr B £300.

Back to top

Final decision

47. I have completed my investigation and found fault by the Council which caused an injustice to Mr B. I am satisfied the action the Council will take is sufficient to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman