Example
C asked for an independent review of the council’s decision. They had applied for a community care grant for flooring for their living room, bedroom, hall, stair, landing, bathroom and kitchen. C explained that there were health issues within the household including mental health problems and allergies. One of the children had a house dust mite allergy and for this reason, C requested laminate flooring over other forms of flooring.
The council assessed that the application met the eligibility criteria and the qualifying criteria, and they awarded items which they assessed met medium priority. They awarded linoleum for the bathroom and kitchen and offered carpets or vinyl for the living room and three bedrooms. C requested a review of the decision, stating that laminate flooring was required due to allergies. The council considered the information, but did not change the decision, stating that vinyl was suitable.
We reviewed the council’s case file and contacted C for further information. We noted that C had provided correspondence from the hospital in relation to managing dust mite allergies. This stated that linoleum or wooden flooring were preferable over carpets as they are easier to clean and don’t harbour house dust mites. From the information available to us we did not assess that laminate flooring was required and that vinyl would be suitable. We therefore did not change the council’s decision as we considered that the award balanced the needs of the applicant against the remaining budget in line with section 4.51 of the guidance.