A weekly update on children and education complaint decisions

Summary: Miss C complained about the Council’s handling of her request for her daughter (X) not to attend school due to her risk of becoming seriously ill from COVID-19. We found no fault in how the Council considered and responded to her request. It was at fault for causing delays in finalising X’s final amended Education, Health, and Care Plan, but this did not cause Miss C or X an injustice. The Council should issue X’s final Plan and provide Miss C with her appeal rights.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to ensure her son, F received a suitable education or the specialist provision set out in his Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan since it was issued in March 2023. The Council failed to have sufficient oversight of F’s placement at an alternative provision between March 2023 and January 2024. It also delayed issuing an amended EHC Plan following an annual review. The Council agreed to pay Mrs X £900 to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty this caused.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a school that the complainant’s child attends. This is because the law prevents us from investigating complaints about what happens in schools.

Summary: We will not investigate these complaints that the Council failed to provide full-time education for the complainant’s children. The complaints about the period before the Education Health and Care Plans were issued are late and there are no grounds to consider them now. We cannot consider the complaints about matters after the Education Health and Care Plans were issued because the complainant has used her right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability).

Summary: We will not investigate these complaints that the Council failed to provide full-time education for the complainant’s children. The complaints about the period before the Education Health and Care Plans were issued are late and there are no grounds to consider them now. We cannot consider the complaints about matters after the Education Health and Care Plans were issued because the complainant has used her right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability).

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s School Admissions Appeal Panel’s handling of her appeal against the refusal to offer her child a place at her preferred school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant further investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to be able to question the merits of its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider his complaint whilst there are ongoing court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the alleged inaccuracy of information about Mr X on Council records. The Information Commissioner's Office is better placed than us to consider alleged data inaccuracy, and it would be reasonable for Mr X to go to court to seek compensation for the direct effect he claims this had on his health.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council taking Miss X’s child into care and having them put up for adoption. The law prevents us from investigating matters subject to court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with matters relating to a child in foster care. This is because doing so would not lead to a different outcome and because we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant seeks.

Summary: There was fault and delay in completing an annual review and a failure to provide suitable fulltime alternative education and special educational provision in an EHC plan for 5.5 terms. This continued after the Council admitted the fault. The fault has caused significant injustice to the whole family and loss of education to the child. The Council will apologise, make a symbolic payment to acknowledge the injustice caused and make service improvements.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council failed to provide her child, C, with a suitable education and she also complains about C’s final Education, Health and Care Plan issued by the Council. There is no evidence of fault and the law does not allow the Ombudsman to investigate matters from November 2023 because they were subject to a tribunal appeal.

Summary: Mrs D complains the Council failed to provide education or special educational provision to her son, J, for over a year. The Council has accepted there was fault. To remedy this it has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs D for J’s educational benefit. We found fault in complaint handling which has caused Mrs D some time and trouble. The Council has agreed to review its complaint policy.

Summary: Ms X complained that the Council placed her son in unsuitable educational provision and delayed in issuing his education, health and care plan. We have not investigated these complaints because they are late. Ms X also complained that the Council failed to make suitable alternative provision for her son after his educational placement broke down and failed to deliver the provision in his education, health and care plan. We found fault on the Council’s part. In recognition of the injustice caused, it has agreed to make a payment to Mrs X.

Summary: We upheld Mrs X’s complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care process regarding her child, Y. The Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the assessment of Miss X’s special educational needs and the provision she requires. These are closely linked to matters in respect of which Miss X has exercised her right to appeal to a Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council managed the annual review of a child’s Education Health and Care plan. This is because the decision to name a school has been appealed to the SEND Tribunal and other matters either have not caused a significant enough injustice or we could not add to the Council’s investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the contents of an Education Health and Care plan. This is because it is reasonable for the complainant to use their right of appeal to a tribunal.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council refused to properly consider his complaint about how it handled a referral relating to the welfare of his children. The Council was at fault for not considering Mr X’s complaint through the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X for the frustration this caused and consider his complaint further.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to properly explain Section 20 of the Children Act and ignored her request to cease accommodating the children under Section 20 of the Act. We found there was no fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to amend and correct information held about the complainant. This is because we would not achieve anything significant by doing so.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed considering a complaint at stages two and three of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint apologising and offering to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the time and trouble they have been too.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to meet her child’s special educational needs and to issue her final Education, Health and Care Plan. Miss X also complained the Council failed to provide her with an advocate and it failed to conduct a carer’s assessment for her. Miss X said this affected her and her child’s mental health, and she suffered financial loss. There were some faults by the Council which caused injustice to C and Miss X. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide a suitable education for her child, Y. There was fault with how the Council responded when it knew Y was not attending school in 2023, delayed its decision after a review of Y’s Education Health and Care plan and delayed transferring Y’s plan after Mrs X moved areas. This caused some frustration to Miss X but did not cause any further injustice. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X, review its policy and procedures and issue reminders to its staff.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has delayed issuing her daughter, F’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan following an annual review in May 2023. She also complained F has not received education in line with her Plan since she stopped attending school in March 2023. The Council was at fault. It has to date not issued F’s amended final EHC Plan which is delay of 43 weeks. It also failed to ensure F received a suitable education between May 2023 and May 2024. The Council agreed to issue F’s Plan without further delay and make payments to recognise the missed education. It will also carry out service improvements.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to ensure the provision in his child's Education, Health and Care Plan was provided and delayed providing suitable education following his child's permanent exclusion from school. Mr X said his child suffered significant distress and he suffered uncertainty about whether the exclusion was avoidable and if suitable alternative provision could have been provided sooner. We have found fault but consider the agreed action of an apology and symbolic payment provides a suitable remedy.

Summary: There was no fault the Council did not make alternative education provision available when Mrs X’s daughter first stopped going to school. The evidence shows the school were initially successful in returning her to school gradually. However, when this arrangement broke down and Mrs X’s daughter stopped attending, there was fault the Council did not consider and decide whether it owed a duty to make alternative education provision available. That fault caused Mrs X an injustice because she now has uncertainty about whether her daughter missed out on education.

Summary: Mrs B complained about the Council’s refusal to provide suitable school transport for her daughter since September 2023. We have not found fault with the actions of the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the education provided to the complainant’s daughter. The complaint is late and Miss X could have complained sooner. It would now be difficult to carry out a meaningful investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the assessment of Mrs X’s child’s special educational needs. Mrs X used her right of appeal to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal, which has decided what the provision for the child should be. She has the right to request fresh assessment by the Council in line with the timescale set out in law.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about educational psychologists’ assessments. It is reasonable to expect her to appeal to the Tribunal the injustice caused by the assessments - the Council’s decisions on her Education Health and Care Plan request for her child.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful school admission appeal. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to be able to question its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Miss X’s application for a school place. This is because it is reasonable for Miss X to use her right of appeal.

Summary: Mr and Mrs B complained that the Council had failed to complete the stage two investigation of their complaint about children’s services within 13 weeks and following an earlier complaint to us. We have not found fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue a blue badge. There is not enough evidence of fault in how it made its decision to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s children’s services. This is because the issues raised are about matters that have been considered during court proceedings and because there are other bodies better placed to consider other matters.

Summary: Mrs Y complained about the way the Council dealt with her child’s education and special educational needs provision. We have found fault with the Council’s delay in completing the Education Health and Care needs assessment process and its communication failures, causing injustice. The Council had already accepted fault and offered a remedy for the injustice. We have found the payments it offered for the impact of the missed special educational needs provision and distress and time and trouble are in line with the expectations in our guidance on remedies. It has agreed to make these payments and service improvements. We have not found a failure by the Council to make appropriate alternative educational provision.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the process of reviewing Ms Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan and about delays in securing the named provision. We find the Council at fault for missing statutory deadlines and for delays in securing provision. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to recognise the injustice caused by the fault.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed completing her child, Child Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment and deciding to issue Child Y with an EHC Plan. The Council was at fault. Its failure to meet its statutory timescales was mainly due to a delay in obtaining Educational Psychologist advice. The Council will apologise, make a payment to Mrs X for the frustration and uncertainty the delays caused and put a service improvement in place for decision letters. The Council has already put service improvements in place for delays and communication.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about information allegedly omitted by the Council when consulting with possible schools in drawing up an Education Health and Care Plan for Mr X’s child. This matter is closely connected to the decision reached by the Council about the most suitable provision, in respect of which Mr X had a right of appeal to the Special Educatuional Needs and Disability Tribunal it would have been reasonable to use.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s Local Authority Designated Officer because there is no evidence that those actions caused the complainant a demonstrable injustice and investigation would not achieve a worthwhile outcome.

Summary: We found fault by the Council on Mrs D’s complaint about how she was dealt with following allegations from her foster child. Concerns were not consistently raised with her, a serious allegation was not properly dealt with, there was a failure to follow procedures, and she was not given information about key developments with the investigation or given clear information about procedures. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X complaint about the Council’s handling of her concerns about incidents involving her child at their school. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about a report. This is because it is being used in ongoing matters with the family court. We have no remit to look at reports used in court.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has not dealt properly with her son Y’s Special Educational Needs (SEN). The Council is at fault because it did not hold an annual review properly. Y lost education provision and Mrs X was denied the ability to appeal to Tribunal. The Council should apologise, Pay Mrs X £6000 for lost education provision, £400 for her time and trouble and avoidable distress, make a decision about incurred costs, provide an action plan and staff training.

Summary: Miss B complained the Council failed to provide suitable education for her son, C, and failed to ensure he received the provision set out in his Education, Health and Care Plan from March 2022 to January 2023. Miss B said C missed education and plan provision and she was distressed and impacted financially by the Councils actions. There was fault in the way the Council did not ensure C received any education or plan provision, did not follow the plan review process and not fully considering Miss B’s complaint. C missed out on education and plan provision for two and a half academic terms. Miss B was frustrated and put to time and trouble to complain. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a financial payment and remind staff of the Councils responsibilities.

Summary: Miss B complained the Council failed to provide appropriate education to her son, C, and failed to ensure he received the provision set out in his Education, Health and Care Plan from September 2022 to September 2023. Miss B said C missed education and provision and she was distressed and impacted financially by the Councils actions. The Council did not provide C with any education or plan provision until appeal rights to the Tribunal were engaged, did not follow the plan review process and did not consider her complaint. C missed out on education and plan provision for one academic term. Miss B was frustrated and put to time and trouble to complain. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a financial payment and remind staff of the Councils responsibilities.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about school admissions. The Council was acting on behalf of academy schools. We have no powers to consider complaints about academies.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel’s failure to provide her child with a place at School Y. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault which caused them to lose out on a school place.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s School Admissions Appeal Panel’s handling of her appeal against the refusal to offer her child a place at her preferred school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant further investigation.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has not dealt properly with Childrens Social Care. The Council wrongly assessed the nature of the care arrangements and did not complete a review of financial support needed. Mrs X suffered financial hardship. The Council should complete a review of financial support.

Summary: Mr and Mrs B complained about the Council’s handling of their application to become respite foster carers. They say the Council unreasonably refused their application despite the fact they have fully cooperated with the process and given as much as information as they can. We do not find fault with the Council’s decision making.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint about delay in the children’s statutory complaints procedure. This is because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s responses to the complainant’s requests for the provision of social care services for her daughter. This is because investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the evidence given in court and the reports written for it. An absolute legal bar prevents us doing so.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about a report. This is because it was used in the family court during private law proceedings between Mr X and another party. We have no remit to look at reports used in court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s alleged failure to safeguard Mrs X when she was a child. This is because parts of the complaint relate to data protection and are best placed for the information commissioner’s office to investigate. The remaining parts of the complaint relate to events that took place more than 12 months ago and are therefore outside of our jurisdiction due to the time that has elapsed.