Somerset Council has been fined nearly £4,000 after an elderly woman was left unable to properly bathe in her own home for 18 months.

The woman, known only as Ms. Y, requested a disabled facilities grant from Somerset County Council in May 2020, which would allow small changes to be made to her property – meaning she could receive care at home rather than moving into a care home.

Her son, known as Mr. X, complained to the council after officers failed to respond to multiple queries by his mother regarding the outcome of her initial assessment – with the council eventually fitting the agreed adaptations to her property in early-2023.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) has ordered the council to formally apologise and pay the family £3,850 to reflect the "distress, frustration and impact upon Mrs Y's dignity" the delay had caused.

Somerset Council – which replaced the county council in April – said it had apologised in writing and would review its procedures to prevent this from happening to anyone else.

The ombudsman exists to investigate allegations of "maladministration" and "service failure" in the public sector – in other words, instances in which it is claimed councils have not fully carried out their legal duties to taxpayers.

Under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, councils have a statutory duty to provide disabled facilities grants (DFG) to implemented "reasonable and practicable" adjustments to the homes of people with disabilities.

Councils will often use occupational therapists to assess what improvements to a given home will be necessary before approving the grant, with the law stating that any DFG application must be assessed within six months of submission, and any building work carried out within 12 weeks of approval.

Ms Y has a number of physical health conditions which affect her mobility, and is in receipt of a care package from the council, including personal care and preparing meals when her husband is at work.

She contacted the council in May 2020, stating that she was no longer able to use her bath or shower and relief on her husband or carer to strip wash.

The council advised her that her needs would be assessed once the coronavirus restrictions were left, and confirmed a DFG package would be provided.

Ms Y chased up the council in July 2020 and finally received a visit from an occupational therapist in early-September 2020.

Ms Y requested an accessible bath, but the therapist said this "was not suitable" for her needs, and Ms Y said she would discuss the issue with her family.

The council advised Ms Y in January 2021 that DFG applications were not being progressed due to the national coronavirus lockdown.

She subsequently chased the council for an update six times between May and November 2021, telling officers that "her condition was deteriorating but she had not heard anything" since her initial visit.

Ms Y's care plan was reviewed by council officers in December 2021, but she received no further communication – prompting Mr X to lodge a formal complaint in February 2022.

Ms Y eventually received follow-up visits from an occupational therapist in late-May and early-June 2022 – with the council formally responding to Mr X's complaint at the end of June.

The council admitted at the time that there was "no evidence of Ms Y receiving a response" to her multiple queries, and agreed to apologise to her.

Ms Y received further visits in late-2022 to assess whether a through floor lift could be installed, with the adaptations finally being implemented in March 2023.

The ombudsman found that the council's initial delay could be mitigated by the national coronavirus restrictions, with Ms Y's chasing-up of officers coinciding with the UK-wide lockdown between January and March 2021.

However, it found "no evidence" that the council took steps to escalate her case until May 2022, or to provide her with any reassurance during the delay.

The delays, the ombudsman ruled, "meant Ms Y was without suitable bathing facilities for around 18 months longer than she should have been, which has caused her distress and frustration and impacted upon her dignity."

The ombudsman criticised the council's "poor communication" throughout the saga, as well as its below-par record-keeping and its response to the original complaint raised by Mr X.

The ombudsman ordered the council to issue a written apology to Ms Y and to pay her £3,850 in compensation – £3,600 for the distress caused by around 18 months' delay in carrying out the adaptations (the equivalent of £200 a months) and £250 for the frustrations caused by officers' failing to properly communicate with her.

The council has also been ordered to review its procedures, ensuring those waiting for adaptations to be rapidly informed of any delays and that accurate records are kept for all cases.

A spokesman for Somerset Council said: "We have accepted the findings and apologised to Mr X and Ms Y for the delay in carrying out these adaptations.

"Additionally, we have financially compensated Ms Y to acknowledge the distress and impact upon her dignity caused by the delay.

"We are committed to providing a good service to residents and it is clear that we didn't do so here, in large part because the flow of information within the team was not good enough.

"We are making revisions to our practices to minimise the chances of that happening again."