The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with issues regarding a Disabled Facilities Grant. This is because the complaint has been made late.
The complaint
The complainant, who I shall call Mr B, complained about the Council’s handling of a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) for bathroom adaptations to meet the needs of his disabled wife (‘Mrs B’). Mr B complained in particular that the Council: did not provide a plan and schedule of works or inform him about a start date before works began; failed to consider an objection he had to part of the plans; failed to intervene regarding a dispute he had with the appointed builders which led to works being suspended and left unfinished for many months; and deducted an unreasonable amount from his DFG to cover the original builder’s costs for work done before he was dismissed by Mr B.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. In particular we normally cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered the information Mr B provided about his complaint. I also took account of Mr B’s comments in response to a draft version of this decision.
My assessment
I consider that we should not investigate matters in Mr B’s case because he has complained to us late and, therefore, the restriction on our jurisdiction which I refer to in paragraph 2 above applies to his complaint.
From the information provided, I understand Mr B was aware in July 2019 about the issues relating to not having the plans in advance, works starting without prior notice, his dispute with the builders and the deduction from Mrs B’s grant.
As I understand it, Mr B raised queries with the Council about these matters in the months after works were suspended in July 2019. But even allowing some time for Mr B to try and pursue his issues with the Council informally, it appears he would also have known within a few months that the Council was not going to resolve matters to his satisfaction.
However I note that Mr B did not make a formal complaint to the Council until March 2021. In addition he took around seven months to bring his complaint to us following the Council’s final response in July 2021.
In the circumstances it is clear Mr B has complained to us well outside the permitted period of 12 months for making complaints.
I am also not convinced there are any grounds for us to exercise our discretion and investigate Mr B’s complaint now despite it being late. In particular I have not seen any evidence to suggest that Mr B was unable to have complained to us at a much earlier stage.
Final Decision
We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with his wife’s DFG. This is because his complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to exercise discretion and pursue matters in his case now.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman