Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a disabled facilities grant application for her child. She says the Council has been vague about what is covered by the grant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of a disabled facilities grant application for her child. She says the Council has been vague about what is covered by the grant and is concerned this will put her in a financially vulnerable position.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X’s child has a disability. She applied for a disabled facilities grant (DFG) to fund adaptations to make their bedroom safer. An Occupational Therapist (OT) assessed Miss X's child to identify what adaptations were required to meet their needs.
6. Between October 2022 and March 2023, the Council said it was discussing the child’s needs and exploring the practical elements of the scheme.
7. In August 2023, the Council said it sent Miss X the grant offer. The Council also said Miss X was aware she needed to get support from an agent to get a formal schedule of works drawn up to enable the Council to go out to tender for contractors.
8. In January 2024, the Council confirmed with Miss X which works were eligible for funding under the DFG. These were:
• Padding on walls throughout, as specified by OT.
• Light fittings to be flush with ceiling/low profile. Metal light switch with dimmable control.
• Padded cover for radiator.
• Air conditioning to manage room temperature. For unit to be fitted in loft space, if possible, otherwise wall mounted model.
• Solid and robust door and frame. Covered with padding to the inside.
• Minimal sockets in room. Socket covers to be robust and safe.
• Flooring due to need for a cleanable surface.
• Internal decoration – two coats of emulsion paint in client’s colour choice to all walls affected by the works. Make good ceilings and walls where doors have been enlarged. Only making good, not classed a redecoration.
9. The Council also confirmed which items/works were not eligible to be funded through the DFG. These included:
• Furniture – including drawers and wardrobes.
• All other decoration of undisturbed surfaces beyond filling and spot painting.
10. In its complaint response, the Council confirmed again that the DFG would cover appropriate flooring in the child’s bedroom, but that furniture would not be included.
11. The Council explained it could not approve the grant yet as it had not received the finalised schedule of works. The Council said once this was provided by Miss X, it would put the works out to tender.
12. An investigation is not justified as we are not likely to find fault. This is because the Council has provided clear information as to what works would be covered under the DFG. Further, the Council has also confirmed that it will put the work out to tender once Miss X provides the finalised schedule of works. It is open to Miss X to agree this and send this to the Council as soon as possible.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman