Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her application for a Disabled Facilities Grant. The Council is not at fault for the way it handled her application.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her application for a Disabled Facilities Grant which she requested for her bathroom. She says it has not carried out the amendments recommended in an occupational therapist’s report.
2. She says this has resulted in her living in a home unsuitable for her needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. 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)
4. 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

5. I have considered:
• The information provided by Miss X and discussed the complaint with her;
• The Council’s comments on the complaint and the supporting information it provided; and
• Relevant law and guidance.
6. Miss X 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

Law and guidance

7. Disabled Facilities Grants are provided under the terms of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. Councils have a statutory duty to give grants to disabled people for certain adaptations. Before approving a grant, a council must be satisfied the work is necessary, meets the disabled person’s needs, and is reasonable and practicable.
8. Section 23 of the Care Act explains the boundary in law between care and support and general housing.

Key events

9. Miss X asked for an occupational therapy bathing assessment in late January 2022.
10. In mid-April 2022 the Council arranged for an occupational therapist to carry out an assessment. This noted Miss X’s concerns. These concerns included that the downstairs bathroom did not have a sink, that there were not enough sockets in the utility, issues with water spreading in the bathroom and the water pressure.
11. The occupational therapist recognised the lack of sink downstairs was a hygiene issue. They tested the flow of water from the shower and decided this seemed enough. They also noted there was no screen to stop the spread of water in the bathroom. Their report concluded that a carer’s screen and wall mounted shower seat needed to be fitted. Which would help keep the water in the shower area and aid Miss X with washing. It noted that the other concerns were the responsibility of the landlord as they did not relate to Miss X’s care needs.
12. In mid-May the Council noted that a quote for a carer screen had been obtained and it would approach the landlord to arrange fitting. The Council says the carer screen was installed in late May 2022. It says following this a shower seat was installed.
13. In July 2022 the Council wrote to Miss X and explained it would not consider a new level access shower room as she had one that met her needs. It explained the issue of water escaping the room should be resolved by the carer screen it had installed.

Findings

14. Following the request for a bathing assessment the Council arranged for the relevant expert, an occupational therapist, to carry out an assessment of Miss X’s needs. Some recommendations and adaptations were made. I understand that Miss X is unhappy with the recommendations and feels the Council should have done more to address her concerns with the property.
15. We can only question a Council’s decision on the recommendations needed where there is fault in the process. I have considered the way in which the Council made its decision that a screen and seat met Miss X’s needs. The Council arranged for an appropriate person to carry out the assessment. It reviewed Miss X’s concerns, her conditions and needs. It considered why she considered the bathroom did not meet her current needs. The Council has considered Miss X concerns and the relevant information when making its decision. There is no fault in the decision-making process.
16. I appreciate that Miss X wanted the Council to address the issues with her downstairs toilet and utility room. While the occupational therapist acknowledged her concerns the Council did not agree to carry out any changes to these areas as it did not relate to her care needs. It is reasonable the Council has not made these changes given its findings and as there was no fault in the decision-making process.
17. Similarly, it is reasonable that the Council did not agree to Miss X’s request for a new bathroom to be installed. The Council felt that Miss X needs could be met by making smaller changes to the bathroom. There is no fault in the Council’s decision-making process and as such I cannot question its decision not to agree to a new bathroom.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I have completed my investigation. I have not found fault with the Council. No further action is required.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman