LGO criticises council for failure to take human rights into account over grant application

The Local Government Ombudsman has criticised a local authority for failing to understand that human rights were an issue when it refused an application for a disabled facilities grant.

Mr and Mrs F had complained about the way Blaby District Council handled their request for adaptations to their bathroom. The changes were needed to make the bathroom accessible for Mrs F, who had a range of health problems.

Blaby agreed that the adaptations were necessary and appropriate, but did not pursue an application for a grant as a result of the complainants’ refusal to take out house insurance.

Their refusal was based on their religious beliefs as committed Christians. However, the council said its policy was only to allow applications to be awarded where such insurance was in place.

The LGO said this requirement was not “on firm ground”, given that Blaby’s own research showed that half of local authorities did not require there to be a policy.

The failure to apply for a grant meant that Mrs F was unable to have a bath for more than nine months.

The Ombudsman, Jane Martin, concluded that there was fault in how Blaby had conduced the screening of the application. The initial officers should have taken individual circumstances into account and not wholly relied on policy, she said.

A more senior officer had done so but had failed to consider relevant issues such as the risks to the council of a lack of insurance, Mrs F’s general vulnerability, the application of human rights, and the validity of her religious beliefs.

The LGO found that there had been maladministration causing injustice. Blaby has agreed to remedy this by:

• Carrying out the adaptations to the bathroom
• Paying Mrs F £1,000 in recognition of the stress and discomfort
• Paying Mr F £250 for the time and trouble in making this complaint,
• Reviewing its policy so that officers are clear that exceptions can be made.

Martin said: “Human rights are important and councils need to be aware of them when they exercise those of their duties that impact on the citizen.

“The right of freedom to pursue religious beliefs is one which seems so obvious in our society that it can be overlooked. But I believe in this case the council did not fully understand that the human rights were an issue here, nor did it have sufficient information upon which to reach a decision.”

The LGO added that the complainant’s needs should have weighed more heavily in the assessment and that its refusal to consider a grant for the badly needed works condemned the complainant to “inadequate and degrading bathing potentially for as long as she lived”.