Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

Home Group Limited (202116828)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202116828

Home Group Limited

7 July 2022


Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for an adaptation to his bathroom.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant. He made a request for his bathroom to be adapted, by way of a larger bath. The landlord arranged for an occupational therapist to carry out an assessment. It subsequently refused to carry out the requested adaptation, based on the therapist’s findings.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord about its decision. The landlord did not alter its decision. It confirmed in its response to the resident’s complaint that any recommendation for a larger bath would need to be provided by a medical professional. Alternatively, the landlord said the resident could submit a request to install a larger bath himself, but he would need to pay for this adaptation if it were approved. 

Assessment and findings

  1. The resident has a long-term health condition and mobility impairments. He requested a larger bath as he believes the current bath is not fit for purpose.
  2. The landlord’s aids and adaptations policy explains that, under the Equality Act 2010, it has a duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people. The policy says that the landlord can arrange minor adaptations (such as grab rails or stair bannisters) itself. However, for other adaptations, an occupational health assessment will be required.
  3. This is also reflected in the landlord’s property management policy, which says that adaptations must be supported by an occupational therapist (or other healthcare professional where appropriate).
  4. As the adaptation required by the resident was not a minor adaptation, it was appropriate for the landlord to arrange for an occupational therapist to carry out an assessment. It appears that this took place on or around July 2021.
  5. This Service has not been provided with a copy of the occupational therapist’s report. However, the Ombudsman has seen the internal correspondence following contact with the occupational therapist in which it was confirmed that the resident’s current bath was fit for purpose and a replacement was not required. Only grab rails were recommended at this time.
  6. As the occupational therapist did not recommend that the resident have a larger bath, it was reasonable for the landlord to rely on their conclusions in this matter. The landlord has since installed grab rails in line with the occupational therapist’s recommendation, which was appropriate.
  7. The landlord has confirmed to the resident that if he wishes to install his own larger bath, then he can submit a request for this. However, he would need to cover the cost of this. This is in line with the landlord’s property management policy which states that a resident can carry out their own adaptations, provided that the tenancy agreement allows it, and they have written permission from the landlord.
  8. The resident may wish to request that a further occupational therapist inspection take place should his condition worsen.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for an adaptation to his bathroom.