Summary
Ms C, who is an advice worker, complained on behalf of her client (Mr A). Mr A was unhappy with the way the council dealt with his concerns about asbestos in his home, about them blocking access to an electrical socket when they altered his ceiling and about the way they handled his complaint.
Our investigation considered whether the council acted in line with legislation and their own policy when dealing with the asbestos. We found that they did and that they responded reasonably to every one of Mr A's requests to have the asbestos tested. We did not uphold this complaint.
We also considered whether Mr A was treated reasonably in relation to the problem with the blocked socket. We found that by arranging for the socket to be repositioned, then adhering to Mr A's wishes for the work to stop, and then reinitiating the work again when Mr A requested it again, the council acted reasonably. We did not uphold this complaint.
Finally, our investigation considered whether the council implemented their complaints procedure reasonably when handling his complaint. We found that the council took three times longer than they should have to provide their final response, did not update him throughout this time, failed to agree longer timescales and there were errors in the response given. We upheld Mr A's complaint about this.
Recommendations
We recommended that the council: issue a further apology for the complaints handling failings identified; and provide a copy of our decision to the member of staff who responded to this complaint on behalf of the council.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201405773 as a PDF (12.7 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018