Summary: Ms X complained about the way works were carried out on her property under a grant provided by the Council. The Ombudsman does not find the Council to be at fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains about the way works were carried out on her property under a grant provided by the Council. She said her property was left in a poor state by builders.

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 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)
3. 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

4. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of the key events

6. The Council wrote to Ms X in January 2024. It said it had approved her application for grant assistance.
7. Ms X signed the home improvement service contract agreement in the following month. The contract noted:
• the role of the contract administrator (the Council) was to inspect the works on behalf of Ms X and reject work that failed to meet the requirements contained within the contract;
• the contract administrator was not responsible for any failure of the contractor to carry out and complete the works contained within the contract documents; and
• the works consisted of emergency repairs to the dormer roof.
8. After the work was completed, Ms X raised a complaint about the lack of work done. The notes state Ms X thought the whole roof was being replaced. But the Council explained the contract stated it was for repairs to the dormer roof only.
9. The Council and contractor met with Ms X shortly after. It was explained that works quoted for had been conducted. It was also noted Ms X had shown officers a new area of damp and mould.
10. The following day, the contractor agreed to replace the whole roof and remove the chimney at no cost to Ms X. Ms X agreed to this.
11. In June 2024, it was noted Ms X was happy with the further works completed. But she said the contractors had been in the loft space and left it looking like a building site.
12. In response the Council stated it had spoken with the contractor who confirmed no works were carried out internally. It said an independent roofing company was also consulted. They confirmed the works carried out would not require internal access. The Council said works were completed in line with those outlined in the contract and all additional works outside the scope of this were carried out at no extra cost.

Analysis- was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

13. The contract signed by Ms X in February 2024 sets out what the Council’s role was. It also detailed the works to be completed consisted of emergency repairs to the dormer roof.
14. The works were completed shortly after, but Ms X complained and said she thought the whole roof was being replaced. But I have not seen any evidence to suggest this was the agreement.
15. In response to Ms X’s complaint, the contractor agreed to replace the whole roof and remove the chimney at no cost to Ms X. This was completed, but Ms X said the contractors had left her property in a state.
16. Whilst the Council provided funding for the initial works to the dormer roof, the further works agreed by the contractor was part of an agreement between the contractor and Ms X. I can only consider the role of the Council. But at this point, the Council had no contractual role in this agreement. Therefore, any complaints about the works of this agreement should be directed to the contractor.

Back to top

Decision

17. I have completed my investigation on the basis there was no fault in the Council’s actions.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman