A SEVERELY disabled teenager's family have won compensation after they waited almost nine months for a council renovation grant for their "unfit" home.
The couple and their five children, including a disabled 13-year-old boy who was incontinent, live in a terrace house with no proper bathroom or indoor toilet.
They had to wait so long for a decision by Pendle Council that the time limit on their successful grant application had almost run out and the work could not to go ahead.
Local Government Ombudsman Patricia Thomas found maladministration in the way the council dealt with the grant.
She and ordered it to pay the father - referred to by the false name of Mr Hussein - the equivalent of the grant he should have got, plus £250 for the delay and his time and trouble.
Renovation grant applications have to be determined within six months and the work carried out within 12 months of approval.
Mr Hussein said his Nelson home needed a damp-proof course, re-roofing, re-wiring and modernised kitchen and bathroom. He applied for a renovation grant in February 1996. A month later the council told Mr Hussein the grant had been approved and he would get £1,859 although the work would cost £8,289. Mr Hussein thought the grant was too small.
The authority said that if Mr Hussein sent proof of the disability allowance he received for his son, his own contribution would be cut to £3,036.
Mr Hussein heard no more about the application until January 1997 while the grant ran out in March.
He asked for more time but the council refused because it was declaring a neighbourhood renewal assessment to see how best to improve the whole area. It offered to re-house the family.
Mrs Thomas concluded: "Had there been no maladministration by the council, he and his family would now be living in an improved home rather than remaining in one regarded by statute as unfit for habitation."
John Kirk, the council's services director, said: "We accept we were rather slow in coming back with a final figure."
He said the council had been concerned about giving a grant to a house that may eventually be demolished or improved anyway as part of the renewal area work.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article