Summary: Ms X says the Council failed to make reasonable adjustments when communicating with her and failed to respond within a reasonable timeframe. We find fault with the Council for failing to make agreed reasonable adjustments when communicating with Ms X and for failing to respond to Ms X within a reasonable timeframe.

The complaint

1. Ms X says the Council has failed to communicate with her in large print as it agreed on numerous occasions and continues to do so. When Ms X complained about this, she says it took the Council an unreasonable amount of time to respond.

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 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)
3. 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

4. I considered Ms X’s complaint and information she provided. I also considered information from the Council and the Equality Act 2010. Ms X and the Council have both accepted my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Equality Act 2010 says an individual or organisation that provides a service to the public, such as councils, must not treat someone worse just because of one or more “protected characteristics”. Protected characteristics include people with disabilities.
6. When the duty arises, the public body is under a positive and proactive duty to look at removing or preventing obstacles to a disabled person accessing its services. If the adjustments are reasonable, it must make them.
7. The Act is supported by a Code of Practice, which is statutory guidance. This means public bodies must have regard to it.
8. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010.
9. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them.

Back to top

What happened

10. Ms X told the Council she required communications to be in a size 18 font. The Council considered Ms X’s request for reasonable adjustments and said it would communicate in her requested font size. However, the Council continued to send documents which were not in large print.
11. Ms X complained to the Council about documentation being sent to her which was not in a larger print.
12. The Council investigated Ms X complaint and upheld it saying it had not consistently complied with her agreed reasonable adjustment and that it took too long to respond to complaints. The Council made some recommendations in relation to the complaints they have upheld. One of the recommendations was “explores a tell us once service for people with reasonable adjustments, reminds staff of the need to comply with reasonable adjustments and timescales.”
13. The Council also offered Ms X a remedy of £50 in recognition of not carrying out the agreed reasonable adjustments. Ms X remained unhappy and bought her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Analysis

14. The Equality Act 2010 says that Council’s should consider requests for reasonable adjustments, and where suitable, agree and provide them. If the Council was not able to provide Ms X with the requested reasonable adjustments, it should have told her this and explained its reasoning why. In this case, the Council agreed to a reasonable adjustment and then failed to consistently make the adjustment.
15. Ms X told the Council on multiple occasions that she required documents to be sent in large print and the Council agreed to do so having considered her request. However, the Council has and continues to send Ms X documents which have not been amended to be in larger print. This was fault by the Council, causing distress and frustration to Ms X, as well as preventing her from being able to fully engage with services.
16. By failing to deliver the agreed reasonable adjustments, the Council has failed to demonstrate how it had due regard of its duties under the Equality Act 2010.

17. The Council did not issue the final complaint response for nearly a year. This was fault in the Council’s complaint handling which has exacerbated the frustration and distress caused to Ms X in addition to the time and trouble spent chasing the complaint.
18. The Council offered Ms X £50 in recognition of the fault and distress. The Ombudsman has clear guidance on remedies which we expect Councils to use when calculating if a financial remedy is warranted. The Council’s offer of £50 is not in line with our guidance on remedies, and therefore I am recommending a higher remedy.
19. The Council also told Ms X it would consider whether a “a tell us once service for people with reasonable adjustments” was needed. As Ms X has continued to receive communication that does not comply with the agreed reasonable adjustments, it is valid to say this service improvement did not address the issue, and as a result the Council will need to fully review how it ensures services are aware of agreed reasonable adjustments.

Back to top

Agreed action

20. Within one month the Council has agreed to:

• Write to Ms X to apologise for the fault identified;
• Pay Ms X £250 in recognition of the frustration caused to her;
• Remind staff of the importance of ensuring any agreed reasonable adjustments are complied with;
• Remind staff of the need to respond to correspondence within a reasonable timeframe.
• Remind complaint handlers of the Ombudsman ‘s guidance on remedies when considering awarding financial remedies.

Within two months the Council has agreed to:

• Review how it records when reasonable adjustments are agreed and how this is shared between services.

The staff reminders should be in writing. The Council should provide us with evidence it has carried out these actions.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I find fault with the Council for failing to deliver the agreed reasonable adjustments. This meant the Council has been unable to show it had due regard to its duties under the Equality Act 2010.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman