The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to award a Disabled Facilities Grant. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.
The complaint
Miss X complains about the Council’s refusal to award a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) to install a high fence in her garden. She says her child, Y has Special Educational Needs (SEN) and requires perimeter fencing to stop him escaping from the garden.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Government guidance says a DFG can be used for provision of safe access to the home. There is no requirement to use a grant to keep a person contained within their home.
The Council considered Miss X’s application and decided that in line with the government guidance, there was no requirement to provide a perimeter fencing funded by a DFG. Therefore, it refused Miss X’s DFG application.
The Council told us it was considering other ways of providing a secure garden for Y - it asked Miss X’s housing association to consider funding the perimeter fencing. And if this is declined, it will provide a smaller scale option through its Minor Adaptation budget.
I appreciate Miss X is unhappy but there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making. It considered Miss X’s application and explained its decision in line with the government guidance. I cannot question the merits of its decision when there is not enough evidence of fault in its decision-making. Therefore, I will not investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman