Summary: There was no fault in how the Council concluded that an extension to Mr C’s property, was not exempt from fees to certify compliance with the Building Regulations.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr C, complains about the Council’s decision that building work carried out to his property is not exempt from fees that the Council charges to certify compliance with building regulations.
2. As a result, Mr C says the Council has incorrectly invoiced him £549.99

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint received from Mr C; and
• reviewed and considered information received from the Council; and
• considered the relevant guidance; and
• communicated with Mr C about his complaint.
6. I also sent a draft version of this document to both parties and invited their responses.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation

7. The Building (Local Authority Charges) Regulations 2010 make provision for Councils to recover the cost of carrying out building control functions, relating to building regulations.
8. Section 4 of the regulations details the exemptions for charges, where building work is solely required by disabled persons. It states:

(1)     Subject to paragraph (2), in relation to an existing dwelling which is, or is to be, occupied by a disabled person as a permanent residence, a local authority shall not fix or recover any charges where the whole of the building work in question is solely-

(a)     for the purpose of providing means of access for the disabled person by way of entrance or exit to or from the dwelling or any part of it, or

(b)     for the purpose of providing accommodation or facilities designed to secure the greater health, safety, welfare or convenience of the disabled person.

(2)     Building work does not fall within paragraph (1)(b) unless the local authority are satisfied that the work consists of—

(a)     the adaptation or extension of existing accommodation or an existing facility or the provision of alternative accommodation or an alternative facility where the existing accommodation or facility could not be used by the disabled person or could be used by the disabled person only with assistance; or

(b)     the provision or extension of a room which is or will be used solely—

(i)     for the carrying out for the benefit of the disabled person of medical treatment which cannot reasonably be carried out in any other room in the dwelling, or

(ii)     for the storage of medical equipment for the use of the disabled person, or

(iii)     to provide sleeping accommodation for a carer where the disabled person requires 24-hour care.

What happened

9. Mr C is disabled and requires the use of a wheelchair to move inside and outside his home.
10. In 2019, Mr C submitted a planning application to make changes to his property. The plans show that these changes included the following:
• Demolition of a garage
• Rear extension, creating an open plan living, kitchen and dining area.
• New entrance to accommodate wheelchair access.
• Widening of doorways to accommodate wheelchair access.
11. On completion of the works, Mr C requested that the Council certify the building work, to ensure it complies with the Building Regulations. Mr C’s view was that this should be exempt of fees.
12. The Council said that, while some elements to the works such as improvements to access were exempt from fees, it did not consider the rear extension to be exempt.
13. The Council said that while the extension did provide additional space, the dining lounge and kitchen area it creates already existed on the original plans, and that these have been readily usable with the improved access, for which there was no fee.
14. The Council’s therefore concluded that, because it considered that the existing accommodation could have been used, it was not exempt from fees in accordance with paragraph (2) (a) of the guidance.
15. Upon contacting the Council, it told the Ombudsman that when making its decision the Building Control Team reviewed the existing and proposed plans, and 3 senior officers agreed that the fee should be payable.
16. Upon contacting the Ombudsman, Mr C provided additional reasons why the works should be exempt, which the Council had not previously considered. Mr C said the extension was for the purpose of storing current and future medical equipment and for accommodating a live-in carer.
17. The Ombudsman asked the Council to consider and comment on this additional information. However, the Council said that the new information did not change its view that the work should be exempt from the fees.
18. The Council said that there is no provision on the proposed plans for the storage of medical equipment, and the proposals remove a garage which may have been suitable for storage.
19. The Council said Mr C did not communicate that the extension would be used to accommodate a carer, there is no space on the plans for this and Mr C’s partner is currently his carer.

Analysis

20. It is clear that Mr C disagrees with the Council’s conclusion that the building works to his property are not exempt from building control fees. The guidance says Councils must be “satisfied” that work fits the relevant criteria, this therefore requires judgement.
21. It is not for the Ombudsman to say whether the Council should or should not have considered the works to be exempt from building control fees. Rather, we look at whether there is fault by the Council in how it reached its decision.
22. I am satisfied that the Council considered all relevant information before making its decision, and that it has properly considered new information subsequently provided by Mr C.
23. The Council reached its decision, in accordance with the relevant guidance. I therefore do not find fault in how it did so.
24. In the absence of any identified fault in the Council’s decision-making process, it is not for the Ombudsman to challenge the judgement of the Council in how it reached this decision.

Back to top

Final decision

25. I have concluded my investigation with a finding of no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman