Summary: Mrs X complained the Council’s cleaning contractor disposed of nearly all Mr Y’s furniture and personal belongings when it cleaned his house while he was in hospital. The Council was at fault for not being clear in its discussions with Mr Y or in its instructions to the contractor.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council’s cleaning contractor disposed of nearly all Mr Y’s furniture and personal belongings when it cleaned his house while he was in hospital.
2. Mrs X said items of sentimental value were removed and Mr Y suffered emotional distress. Mrs X said she incurred costs replacing some of the items the contractor removed.

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 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)
4. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), as amended)
5. 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)
6. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. As part of the investigation I have considered the following:
• The complaint and the documents provided by the complainant.
• Documents provided by the Council, including photographs of Mr Y’s home before and after the cleaning work.
• The Public Health Act 1936.
8. Mrs 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

Safeguarding

9. A council must make enquiries if it thinks a person may be at risk of abuse or neglect and has care and support needs which mean the person cannot protect themselves. An enquiry is the action taken by a council in response to a concern about abuse or neglect. An enquiry could range from a conversation with the person who is the subject of the concern, to a more formal multi-agency arrangement. A council must also decide whether it or another person or agency should take any action to protect the person from abuse. (section 42, Care Act 2014)

Cleaning of premises

10. Where a council considers a premises is in such a filthy condition that it is prejudicial to health, or is verminous, it may take action to remedy the situation.
11. That could include serving a notice requiring the occupier to take steps specified by the council. This includes cleaning and disinfecting the premises and may require the removal of items. (Public Health Act 1963, section 83(1))
12. If a person cannot comply with the notice, a council may carry out the requirements itself. (Public Health Act 1963, section 83(2))
13. If a council considers any article in the premises is in such a filthy condition that it poses a danger of injury or is a risk to the health of people in the premises, the council may clean, purify, disinfect, or destroy the article. (Public Health Act 1963, section 84)

What happened

14. I have detailed below some key events leading to Mrs X’s complaint. This is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
15. The Council received safeguarding referrals about Mr Y’s self-neglect on 15 and 21 March 2022. The police provided photographs and an officer said, ‘Once we gained entry to his house, the conditions were some of the worst I’ve seen’.
16. The Council instructed a cleaning contractor (the contractor) to carry out a deep clean of Mr Y’s home.
17. A note from the contractor dated 26 March 2022 states: ‘The bed, chairs, tables and sofas are all damaged and needs to be disposed off [sic]’. There was no mention of any other furniture, or about white goods or kitchen appliances.
18. A Council officer, who I will refer to as Officer One, telephoned Mr Y to discuss this. Mr Y agreed for the contractor to dispose of broken furniture. Officer One recorded that Mr Y said the only things he wanted to keep were his walking stick, hospital letters on the mantel piece, and his easy chair.
19. Officer One then telephoned the contractor and said Mr Y ‘just wants to keep his walking stick, easy chair and hospital letters’.
20. The contractor completed the deep clean and disposed of the broken and contaminated furniture and rubbish by 1 April 2022.
21. Mrs X telephoned the contractor three times in April 2022. She said Mr Y’s house was not clean and the contractor disposed of a cabinet containing valuables, and flat screen televisions. The contractor said it cleaned the cabinet and left it in Mr Y’s house. It said there were no flat screen televisions, only old broken ones.
22. Mrs X complained to the Council on 11 July 2022 about the attitude and conduct of Officer One. She asked the Council to take up the complaint with the contractor for throwing away Mr Y’s belongings. She also asked for compensation.
23. The Council contacted the contractor about Mrs X’s complaint on 24 August 2022. The contractor told the Council Mr X’s home was not secured when it arrived. It said it found no letters in Mr X’s house. It also said it did not find or throw away anything of sentimental value. It said it disposed of furniture because it was broken or soaked in urine and faeces, posing a health hazard.
24. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint on 23 December 2022, more than five months later. It said it was concerned by the allegations about Officer One’s behaviour and would raise this with them. It acknowledged Officer One did not get things right in terms of communicating clearly and sensitively.
25. The Council said Mr Y consented to broken furniture being thrown away and only asked to keep a walking stick, easy chair, and letters. It repeated what it had been told by the contractor about the house not being secure, and about no letters or sentimental items being thrown away. The Council said the contractor gave Mr Y a clean, safe and habitable home to return to.
26. The Council said it referred Mr Y to a local furniture store who donated five items, including table, chairs, bed, mattress, and sofa. It also tried to refer Mr Y to a welfare support service for a new cooker and washing machine, but he could not find his National Insurance number so the application could not be completed.
27. Due to the distress Mr Y and Mrs X suffered, the Council offered Mr Y £250 to compensate him for the remaining items he had to replace.

My investigation

28. Mrs X told me the contractor removed a television and stand, microwave, electric fire, crockery, cutlery, pans and casserole dishes, kettle, toaster, radio, vacuum cleaner, pillows, dressing table, mobile phone, walking stick, reading glasses, bathroom scales, electric shaver, towels, clothes, shoes, and slippers. She said she spent £1,330 replacing these items, as Mr Y could not afford to.
29. Mrs X also said the contractor removed photographs of family, a cabinet and sideboard, family ornaments, a home-made coffee table, a family members’ wheelchair, and jewellery. She said these items were of sentimental value to Mr Y.
30. The Council told me it arranged a deep clean after receiving safeguarding referrals from the ambulance service, hospital, and police about self-neglect and the condition of Mr Y’s home.
31. The Council said Mr Y’s home required a great deal of work in order to make it habitable. Mr Y’s desired outcome was to remain in his home and have help with cleaning. The Council said it spoke with Mr Y about consent to clean his home and dispose of broken furniture. The Council also asked Mr Y what items he wished to keep.
32. The Council said it did not instruct its contractor to dispose of items in good condition. It requested a deep clean.
33. The Council said when its contractor arrived at the house, they found the door damaged, and the house was not secure. The contractor told the Council nothing of sentimental value was found or thrown away. The contractor left some items, including a cabinet box and fridge.
34. The Council offered Mr Y £250 when it could not help him replace his cooker and washing machine. The Council said it was willing to offer Mrs X £100 and Mr Y a further £150 in recognition of the delays.

Analysis

35. Mrs X complained the Council’s contractor disposed of nearly all Mr Y’s furniture and belongings. On the evidence seen, Officer One spoke to Mr Y while he was in hospital. Mr Y agreed for the contractor to dispose of broken items. The officer asked Mr Y what he wanted to keep. Mr Y listed a walking stick, chair, and hospital letters. I found the officer then gave this information to the contractor.
36. Unfortunately, there was confusion or a breakdown in communication about what Mr Y wanted. Given the circumstances, I consider Mr Y told the Council about items he wanted to keep, or that were important, because they were the things he could immediately think of. It appears Officer One told the contractor they were the only items Mr Y wanted to keep, which the contractor took to mean all other items could be disposed of. On balance, I do not consider that was Mr Y’s intention. That was evidenced by the distress he suffered when he returned home to find his house almost empty of possessions. Officer One should have been much clearer about this. That was fault. I only found evidence Mr Y agreed for damaged items to be disposed of. He did not agree to all his possessions except the three items stipulated to be disposed of.
37. The Council said some items its contractor disposed of were contaminated and posed a health risk. I have not seen evidence of fault in this regard. The Council has powers to require contaminated items are cleaned, disinfected, or destroyed. The evidence I have seen of the condition of Mr Y’s home before the cleaning work supports the Council’s stance. Some carpets and possessions were heavily soiled and there were signs of animal waste.
38. Mrs X also complained the Council disposed of Mr Y’s paperwork and letters. Unfortunately, there is no clear evidence about this. I saw photographs of Mr Y’s home. Some were taken by emergency services when Mr Y went to hospital. Some were taken by the Council’s contactor when they started cleaning. None of the photographs show any letters or paperwork.
39. The Council’s contractor said Mr Y’s home was not secure when it arrived, and it found no paperwork. The only contemporaneous evidence is a note from the contractor on 25 April 2022. This states no letters or bank statements were found. There is no evidence on which I can say the contractor disposed of Mr Y’s paperwork. I therefore did not find fault in this regard.
40. In conclusion, I did not find the Council at fault for the damaged or contaminated items the contractor disposed of. However, I did find the Council at fault over the remaining items the contractor disposed of, as I found this was not Mr Y’s intention. The Council was not sufficiently clear in its discussions with Mr Y or in its instructions to the contractor.
41. The removal of nearly all Mr Y’s possessions caused him upset and distress. The Council recognised this injustice and sought to help Mr Y find new furniture. It also offered £250 to replace white goods and £100 for its delays. I consider this only goes some way to remedying Mr Y’s injustice and I have made added recommendations.
42. The Council also recognised the distress Mrs X suffered by offering her £100 for its delays. I consider this to be a suitable remedy for Mrs X’s injustice.

Back to top

Agreed action

43. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council will:
• Apologise to Mr Y for delays and for its contractor removing nearly all his possessions.
• Pay Mr Y £400 for replacement white goods.
• Pay Mr Y £300 to recognise the avoidable distress he suffered.
• Apologise to Mrs X for delays and pay her £100 to recognise the distress she suffered.
44. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

45. I have completed my investigation. The Council was at fault for not being clear in its discussions with Mr Y or in its instructions to the contractor.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman