Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing to complete a housing needs occupational therapy assessment. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council refused to complete an occupational therapist’s (OT) assessment to consider whether a property met his needs. He said because of that he had to arrange a private OT assessment for himself and had missed out on a property that he had hoped to move into. Mr X said the Council also contacted his doctor without his consent. Mr X wants the Council to refund him the private OT assessment costs.

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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(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 and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In its complaint response, the Council confirmed an OT had completed a site visit with Mr X to Property 1. They did not assess it as suitable for Mr X’s needs because of accessibility issues. A second property became available (Property 2); however, its layout was similar to Property 1. Therefore, the OT decided that Property 2 would also be unsuitable without further assessment. The Council acknowledged the private OT assessment came to different findings to its but said it could not comment on the conflicting assessments.
6. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. The Council has completed an OT assessment and set out its reasons why the properties were not suitable. It based that decision on an in-person site visit and information from additional sources. Given the similarity of the properties, we would not be critical of the Council not completing a further assessment. I recognise the private OT assessment came to a different finding, but that does not mean the Council’s decision was incorrectly made. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council assessed the suitability of the properties to justify our involvement.
7. The Council said it found no evidence in Mr X’s case records that it had asked for his consent before contacting his doctor. It apologised for this. That apology remedies any injustice caused. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman