Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with issues about a lift at the rear of his property This is his entrance to his home. Mr X said the Council has not resolved the issues and he is unable to independently leave his home because of this. There was fault by the Council. The Council has to date failed to resolve the issues with the lift. This delay has impacted on Mr X’s independence and ability to access the community. Mr X is continuing to suffer significant ongoing injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a financial payment and resolve the issues Mr X faces.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with issues about the lift at the rear of his property, his entrance to his home. Mr X said the Council has not sorted the issues and he cannot independently leave his home because of this. This has caused Mr X significant frustration and distress.

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 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

4. I read Mr X’s complaint and spoke to him about it on the phone.
5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. Mr X and the Council 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

Background information

7. Sections 9 and 10 of the Care Act 2014 require councils to carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. They must provide an assessment to everyone regardless of their finances or whether the council thinks the person has eligible needs. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. It must also involve the individual and where suitable their carer or any other person they might want involved.
8. Councils must carry out assessments over a suitable and reasonable timescale considering the urgency of needs and any variation in those needs. Councils should tell people when their assessment will take place and keep them informed throughout the assessment.
9. The Care Act 2014 gives councils a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan. The care and support plan should consider what needs the person has, what they want to achieve, what they can do by themselves or with existing support and what care and support may be available in the local area. When preparing a care and support plan the council must involve any carer the adult has. The support plan must include a personal budget, which is the money the council has worked out it will cost to arrange the necessary care and support for that person.
10. The NHS criteria for an electric powered wheelchair is the applicant, “as a result of a medical condition, must be unable to walk at all and be unable to self-propel a manual wheelchair at all”.

What happened

11. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
12. Mr X has additional needs and uses a self-propelled wheelchair.
13. The Council completed a support plan in August 2021. The plan recommended a platform lift to enable Mr X to move between his home and his back garden.
14. The Council amended the plan in March 2022 following a request from Mr X to raise the height of his patio. The contractor appointed to complete the work emailed the Council to confirm Mr X could not use his front door due to it being heavy and not electric. The contractors started work at the end of March 2022.
15. The contractors completed the work at the end of April 2022. Mr X contacted the Council the following day to say the lift was not suitable for him. He stated it tilted him backwards and forward when he went over a lip on the lift. The Council completed a visit to Mr X’s home and confirmed his wheelchair wouldn’t tip due to a safety feature on the chair. The Council stated he needed a powered wheelchair to overcome the lip on the lift. The Council advised Mr X to approach his doctor to refer to the service.
16. Mr X complained to the Council in August 2022. He complained the lift did not work for him. Mr X told the Council he did not meet the criteria for a powered wheelchair. The Council again advised him to contact his doctor to refer to the wheelchair service.
17. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint at the end of August 2022. The response confirmed the lift was not easy to self-propel onto and repeated its recommendation about an electric wheelchair and referring to his doctor.
18. The Council completed a new assessment in April 2023. The assessment confirmed Mr X could not use the lift without assistance. It also stated he could not use the front door and uses the rear door to access his home as this was automatic. Mr X said he had not independently accessed the community for four years.
19. Mr X complained again in September 2023. He complained about the lift not working properly and the way the Council dealt with the issue.
20. The Council responded in October 2023. The Council told Mr X an engineer completed a visit and determined there was no issue with the lift. The Council agreed to work with Mr X to find a solution to the issues with the lift.
21. In February 2024 the Council noted the lift would need to be replaced without any step onto the platform.
22. Mr X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Mr X would like the Council to change or adapt the lift so he can use it.
23. In response to my enquiries the Council confirmed Mr X has had issues with the lift since the contractor installed it. The Council stated it believed Mr X would benefit from an electric wheelchair. The Council advised it was working with Mr X to come up with a solution to the issues.

My findings

24. The wording of Mr X’s care plan confirms he needed the lift to access his garden. However, it is clear and the Council has accepted this is also Mr X’s access to and from his home. The front door is not automatic and too heavy for Mr X to open. This is confirmed in the emails to the Council from the contractor in March 2022 when installing the lift, as well as later care plans. Mr X also reported the front of the property was not suitable for a ramp. The rear of the property is the only way Mr X can independently leave his home and access the community. Mr X has not been supported to leave his home by carers and cannot leave on his own. Mr X wants to access the community independently but has not been able to since the adaptation to his property. He used to go shopping, to the cinema and to see friends but he has been prevented from doing so due to being unable to safely leave his home.
25. Mr X is unable to independently use the lift, installed in 2022. He cannot get over the lip on and off the platform. Mr X told the Council this the day after the contractor completed installation.
26. The Council advised Mr X to contact his doctor to request a powered wheelchair. Mr X told the Council he was not eligible. Paragraph 10 of this decision details the criteria for a powered wheelchair. Mr X can self-propel in his wheelchair. He informed the Council that given this he would not be eligible for a powered wheelchair. The Council should not have assumed Mr X would be eligible. It should have taken action to address his concerns about accessing the lift using the self-propelled wheelchair he relied on
27. The lift is not suitable for Mr X’s needs. He cannot independently use it. This means he is unable to access the local community as this is his only workable access in and out of his home. The Council should have corrected the issues when Mr X reported them. This is fault. This frustrated Mr X. It restricted his ability to independently leave his home and impacted his mental health.
28. The Council has still not resolved the issue two years later. Some of this delay is due to the Council relying on its view Mr X needed and would be entitled to an electric powered wheelchair. This delay has frustrated Mr X and severely impacted on his independence and ability to engage in social activities or shop for himself. This has caused Mr X significant injustice which remains ongoing while the situation is unresolved.
29. The Council has accepted it needs to take action to resolve the issue and Mr X is awaiting the solution. Whilst this is positive, it should not have taken 2 years and a complaint to this office for it to recognise this.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Mr X and Y by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Mr X for failing to resolve the issues with the lift. This apology should be in accordance with the Ombudsman’s new guidance Making an effective apology.
• Pay Mr X £250 per month from when he first reported the issue in April 2022 until the Council successfully resolves the issue. This will be as an acknowledgement for the significant impact the inability to leave his home has had on Mr X.
• Complete an action plan detailing the timeline to confirm when the corrective action will be completed. Ensure there is senior officer oversight of progress to ensure no further delays occur.
31. The Council should provide evidence of the actions taken to satisfy the recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

32. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Mr X.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman