Summary: Miss Y complained the Council wrongly cancelled her application for a Disabled Facilities Grant. We have found fault by the Council causing injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy this by apologising to Miss Y and making a payment to reflect the distress and difficulties its fault caused Miss Y and her family.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I am calling Miss Y, complains the Council wrongly cancelled her Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) application in November 2021 for an extension to her home to provide a separate bedroom for one of her children. She only found out the DFG application had been cancelled in October 2022. Although the Council then re-instated the application, and work has recently started, this has been delayed by a year because of the Council’s error.
2. Miss Y says this delay has caused her devastating distress and impact on her mental health. She gave up her room to her child so they could have a separate bedroom. She has had to sleep in the living room on chairs and an airbed until the work is completed.
3. She wants the Council to make an additional payment towards the total cost of the work and offer compensation for the physical and mental damage the delay caused to the whole family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these.
5. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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. I spoke to Miss Y, made enquiries of the Council and read the information Miss Y and the Council provided about the complaint.
8. I invited Miss Y and the Council to comment on a draft version of this decision. I considered their responses before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

Relevant Legislation: Disabled Facilities Grants

9. 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.
10. The maximum grant payable by a council is £30,000. A council can award other discretionary help if it thinks it is necessary. The council grant amount is subject to a means test. The test does not apply to applications from landlords, or from parents for grants for their disabled children.

The DFG Process

11. In March 2022 the government issued non-statutory guidance “Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) Delivery: Guidance for local authorities in England.
12. This guidance identifies five key stages to delivering home adaptations:

• Stage 1: First contact with the service. Councils should ensure the public has access to information and advice about the DFG process;
• Stage 2: First contact to assessment and identification of the relevant works. An occupational therapist (OT) will assess the person’s needs and potential solutions through home adaptations;
• Stage 3: Identification of the relevant works to submission of the formal grant application. The person completes and submits the application form together with designs and costing for the works (where necessary);
• Stage 4: Grant application to grant decision. The Council will check the application and issue a decision letter. If a council refuses a grant, it must explain why; and
• Stage 5: Approval of grant to completion of works. The works are arranged and carried out and the necessary quality checks made.

13. A council should decide a grant application as soon as reasonably practicable. In addition, the timescales for moving through the stages will depend on the urgency and complexity of the works required. The guidance gives the following timescales:

• Urgent and simple works – 55 working days
• Non-urgent and simple works – 130 working days
• Urgent and complex works – 130 days
• Non-urgent and complex works – 180 working days

14. Once the work is complete, the council must pay the grant in full within 12 months of the application date.

What happened

15. I have set out a summary of the key events below. It is not meant to show everything that happened. It is based on my review of all the evidence provided about this complaint.

Miss Y’s DFG application

16. In March 2021 the Council’s OT team referred Miss Y’s request for a DFG for adaptions to her home to meet her children’s needs. The adaptations included alterations and an extension to meet one child’s need for a separate bedroom.
17. The Council completed a feasibility assessment and its panel approved the request.
18. In August 2021 the Council’s Private Sector Housing team was asked to process Miss Y’s DFG application. The application process included a visit by a Home Improvement Officer.

Home Improvement Officer visit

19. A Home Improvement Officer (HIO) visited Miss Y’s home in November 2021. Based on the beds seen in the children’s rooms on their visit, they concluded one child was now living with their father and, after discussion with the OT team, that the extension was no longer needed.
20. The HIO closed Miss Y’s application for a grant for the extension but proceeded with the application for a grant for the other adaptations.

The DFG application for the other adaptations

21. The Housing team obtained the further information required for the application process, including the necessary consents and contractors’ quotes.
22. The amount of the grant was approved in April 2022 and the chosen contractor instructed to carry out the work.
23. The adaptations were completed in September 2022.

September 2022: Miss Y asks the Council about the extension

24. Following the completion of the adaptations, Miss Y asked the Council when the work on the extension would start.
25. The Council said this part of her application had been cancelled because it understood in November 2021, one of her children was now living with their father and the additional bedroom was no longer needed.
26. Miss Y told the Council this was not the case. The child was still living with her.
27. The Council accepted it had misunderstood the situation and should not have cancelled the grant application for the extension.

The DFG application for the extension

28. The Council restarted the grant application for the extension. It arranged for plans to be drawn up, obtained the necessary planning and building control approvals and quotes.
29. The cheapest quote was more than £30,000, the maximum grant the Council could make. Miss Y and her social landlord agreed to pay the balance.
30. The grant was approved and offered to Miss Y in July 2023. The work for the extension started in November 2023.

Miss Y’s complaint

31. Miss Y complained to the Council about its handling of her application for a grant for the extension.
32. The Council accepted it should have checked the position with her in November 2021, instead of assuming the extension was no longer needed. It also accepted wrongly cancelling the application caused an avoidable delay of 12 months in the process and the start of the work on the new bedroom. It apologised for the distress this caused.
33. The Council says it cannot make any additional payment towards the cost of the work because it has already made the maximum grant amount allowed of £30,000.

My view – was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

34. The Council has accepted, and I agree, it should have checked the position with Miss Y before taking any action and it wrongly cancelled her DFG application for the extension in November 2021.
35. I also note the Council didn’t even tell her at the time this part of her application had been cancelled. Had it done so she would have been able to correct the Council’s misunderstanding. All of this was fault.

Impact of the fault

36. Because of the Council’s fault the approval of the grant for the extension was delayed by 12 months. Miss Y and her family have had to wait a year more than they should have done for the work to start on the additional bedroom they need.
37. I don’t consider it is appropriate to recommend the Council make an additional payment towards the cost of the work. I don’t have any evidence the delay caused an increase in the cost of the work and the Council is already making the maximum grant of £30,000 it is allowed to award for the work.
38. But I consider the delay, and not having the additional bedroom needed, has caused Miss Y and her family avoidable difficulties, frustration and distress over the further year they had to wait for the work to start.

Back to top

Agreed action

39. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults and, within four weeks from the date of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. apologise to Miss Y for wrongly cancelling her application for a DFG for the extension and the delay and upset this caused. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings; and
2. pay Miss Y £350 to reflect the frustration, distress and difficulties the delay caused her and her family. This is a symbolic amount based on our guidance on remedies.
40. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

41. I have completed my investigation and found fault by the Council causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take the above action as a suitable way to remedy the injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman