The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s Occupational Therapist failing to review adaptation works before signing them off. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
The complaint
Miss X complains the Council’s Occupational Therapist (OT) failed to review adaptation works before signing them off. She says this means the Council has failed to meet her disabled child’s needs and put her child at risk of entrapment within the home.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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 with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
I considered the complainant’s comments before making a final decision.
My assessment
Miss X has a disabled child. She applied for a disabled facilities grant. As part of this process, the County Council (CC) is responsible for allocating an OT to assess the child’s eligible needs and to recommend adaptation works to meet those needs.
As the CC agreed Miss X needed a major adaptation works, it contacted Miss X’s district council to plan and agree a suitable scheme. The role of the district council is to provide the grant for the work (administration of the grant) and to make sure the works meet their standards.
The role of the CC’s OT is to review the adaptation works and consider whether the adaptations completed meet the child’s needs. The Council said its records showed the OT visited Miss X’s property twice, in November 2021 and April 2022, before signing off most of the works.
It is for the OT to exercise their professional judgment to decide whether they are satisfied the adaptations meet the needs of the child. The OT appropriately visited Miss X’s property before reaching their decision.
We cannot overturn a decision if it has been made properly. Therefore, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
Finally, we note Miss X has complained about risk of entrapment for her disabled child as she feels the adaptation works have not been completed satisfactorily. However, matters related to the quality and standards of the adaptation works are for the district council to address, not the CC.
Final decision
We should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman