| Please note: our decisions are published six weeks after they are issued to councils, care providers and the person who has made the complaint. The cases below reflect the caselaw and guidance available at the time of issue and the individual circumstances of each case. Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (24 010 066)
Summary: The Council has delayed sending decisions following annual reviews of children and young peopleâs Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans. The Council has also delayed carrying out amendments to EHC Plans following annual reviews. This has meant many children and young people are having to wait too long to receive a decision about whether the Council will amend their EHC Plan. For those children and young people where the Council decided to amend the Plan, many of them had to wait too long to receive an updated EHC Plan. Surrey County Council (24 010 219)
Summary: Mrs B complained the Council failed to follow the statutory process for issuing an Education, Health and Care Plan, for her son, X, following a Tribunal Order. Mrs B says this meant X missed provision which should have been included in his Plan. We have found the Council at fault for the delay in issuing a final amended Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs B and make a symbolic payment to recognise the frustration and uncertainty caused by the delay. Essex County Council (24 013 524)
Summary: We will not investigate Miss Xâs complaint about Education Health and Care Plan issues. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to appeal to the Tribunal. And those matters separable from an appeal are not significant enough fault or cause significant enough direct injustice to warrant an investigation. Cornwall Council (24 014 701)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr Xâs complaint about the Councilâs decision to refuse his application for free home to school transport for her daughter. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation. Worcestershire County Council (24 016 069)
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs Xâs complaint about matters related to the Councilâs data handling. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mrs X to pursue the matter through the courts. Lancashire County Council (24 001 670)
Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to secure the speech and language therapy in her child, Wâs, Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council was not at fault. However, it was at fault for failing to respond to Ms Xâs complaints properly. This caused Ms X avoidable frustration, for which the Council should apologise and pay her £100. Worcestershire County Council (24 005 476)
Summary: Mr D complained the Council failed to provide his daughter with suitable full-time education and provision when she was unable to attend school for medical reasons. We find the Council was at fault for its delay in dealing with Mr Dâs daughterâs education and provision when she was struggling to attend school. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault. Essex County Council (24 005 563)
Summary: Mrs E complained the Council caused and continues to cause, delays in the Education, Health, and Care needs assessment process for her daughter. The Council accepted it caused a service failure. It should make payment to Mrs E to acknowledge the injustice its delays have, and continues to, cause. Gloucestershire County Council (24 007 540)
Summary: We found fault on Mr Yâs complaint about the appeal panel failing to follow proper procedure when it rejected his appeal against the Councilâs decision, as admission authority, to refuse his son a place at his preferred school. There was a failure to show the panel properly considered the prejudice case and how it balanced this against Mr Yâs submissions. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused. Hertfordshire County Council (24 008 139)
Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to provide a suitable education for her son when he was of compulsory school age. We found there was delay in finding a suitable placement by the Council and no alternative provision was made. There was also delay in issuing her sonâs Education Health and Care Plan. We recommended an apology and payment to recognise the lost provision and distress caused. Southampton City Council (23 017 741)
Summary: Mr X complained about the Councilâs administration of his home improvement loan. He said the Council paid the contractor before they completed the necessary works. This meant that Mr X did not have enough money left to hire another contractor to complete his home improvements. Additionally, Mr X said the Council did not communicate with him effectively about his complaints. We found the Council was at fault for sending the money to Mr Xâs contractor before checking they had completed the required works. Additionally, we consider there was fault in the Councilâs stage two investigation into Mr Xâs complaint and overall drift in how the Council progressed Mr Xâs case. Birmingham City Council (23 018 801)
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to ensure that his son received adequate care whilst he was placed with foster carers. We find the Council at fault for its delay handling Mr Xâs complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X. City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (24 001 902)
Summary: We have not reinvestigated Mrs Yâs complaint because it has already been subject to a thorough and independent investigation under the statutory childrenâs complaints procedure. We have also seen evidence to show the agreed recommendations have been implemented by the Council. However, the recommendations do not go far enough in remedying the personal injustice Mrs Y experienced from the fault and the Council has agreed to implement the remedial action in the final section of this statement. Cheshire East Council (24 008 464)
Summary: We have discontinued the investigation into Mr Xâs complaint about childrenâs social care conduct. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants. Blackpool Borough Council (24 013 790)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about child protection matters. This is because the issues raised either have been or could reasonably have been mentioned as part of court proceedings and because it is reasonable for the complainant to return to court. Devon County Council (24 016 105)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Councilâs involvement in Mr Xâs childrenâs case. We have no legal power to investigate events prior to June 2023. We cannot achieve the outcomes Mr X seeks, there is not a good reason for the delay in him complaining to us about some elements of the complaint and it was reasonable, in any event, for him to raise all concerns as part of closely related private proceedings. Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (23 018 950)
Summary: Mrs U complains on behalf of her daughter (Miss X). They complain about the Councilâs decision, at short notice, to change the further education college named on Miss Xâs Education, Health and Care Plan without involving her. They also complain the new college was not delivering parts of Miss Xâs Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council delayed reviewing the Plan and carrying out a social care assessment. We uphold the complaint. The Council has agreed to our recommendations. Suffolk County Council (24 013 064)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about 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. London Borough of Wandsworth (24 013 416)
Summary: We cannot investigate Ms Xâs complaint the Council failed to update her child, Yâs Education and Health Care Plan and misled her about a reassessment for additional support. This is because Ms X has used her right of appeal to a tribunal and the issues she raises are not separable from that appeal. Leicestershire County Council (24 013 774)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Mr Zâs education provision. This is because the complaint is made late, and I see no good reason to exercise discretion and consider it now. Birmingham City Council (24 013 993)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Councilâs response to the complainantâs concerns about the driver of her sonâs school transport. This is because investigation would not lead to the outcome she is seeking. Essex County Council (24 015 236)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about 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. Essex County Council (24 015 249)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about 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. North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (24 015 275)
Summary: We will not investigate Miss Xâs complaint about her childâs education. Miss X has appealed to a tribunal which places the complaint outside our jurisdiction. London Borough of Waltham Forest (24 013 236)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about fault in a child protection matter. Investigation by us of the Councilâs actions in respect of Mx X would be unlikely to find sufficient evidence of fault to warrant our further involvement. Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (24 014 969)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr Xâs complaint about a data breach by the Council and about its response to his data requests. This is because complaints about data matters, such as this, are best considered and decided by the Information Commissionerâs Office. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (24 015 603)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Councilâs assessment of Mr Xâs children. The matter has been considered in court, so we have no power to investigate it as well. It is open to Mr X to refer the matter back to the courts for compensation. Royal Borough of Greenwich (24 013 740)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Councilâs response to the complainantâs concerns about his childrenâs welfare. This is because we cannot achieve the outcomes the complainant is seeking. Bracknell Forest Council (23 014 208)
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council took too long to approve a tutor for her son. We found the Council was at fault for the delay in approving a tutor for Mrs Xâs son. The Council agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mrs X and Mr S and improve its practice. West Northamptonshire Council (24 000 493)
Summary: Mrs X complains the Council delayed issuing Child Yâs Education, Health and Care Plan and failed to arrange alternative provision. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for the delay in issuing the plan, and the delay in accepting it had a Section 19 duty to provide alternative provision. The Council has agreed to pay financial remedies in recognition of the injustice caused. Birmingham City Council (24 003 456)
Summary: We have found the Council at fault for failing to secure the Special Educational Needs provision in Mrs Xâs daughterâs Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment, and put the provision in place as soon as possible. Wiltshire Council (24 004 647)
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs Xâs complaint about Education Health and Care Plan issues. We are unlikely to find fault and it is reasonable to expect her to appeal to the Tribunal. Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (24 005 516)
Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to arrange alternative provision for her child, W, when they stopped attending school in November 2022. The Council was at fault for failing to consider Ms Xâs medical evidence. This caused Ms X avoidable upset and frustration for which the Council will apologise and pay her £150. Hertfordshire County Council (24 007 239)
Summary: Mrs X complains the Council did not provide her child with suitable alternative provision. She says this impacted her childâs education and wellbeing. We find the Council at fault which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and make payments to Mrs X and her child. West Sussex County Council (24 013 193)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about 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. Essex County Council (24 013 906)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about 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. Essex County Council (24 014 708)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about 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. Essex County Council (24 015 624)
Essex County Council (24 015 624) Essex County Council (24 015 847)
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs Xâs complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X and pay her £100 per month for the delay. We consider this an appropriate remedy and further investigation is therefore unlikely to achieve anything more. Lincolnshire County Council (24 007 299)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council falsely claimed the complainantâs children were Children in Need, and that it was at fault in its responses to her subsequent complaint and her Right to Rectification request. This is because there is nothing significant to be gained from investigation. Sunderland City Council (24 012 992)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr Xâs complaint about child protection. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in how it reached its decision to warrant our further involvement, and we could not achieve the outcome he is seeking. Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (24 015 326)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr Xâs complaint about the Councilâs handling of matters involving his grandchildren. The law prevents us from investigating anything that has been the subject of court proceedings. Surrey County Council (23 019 509)
Summary: The Council was not at fault for initially refusing to deliver alternative educational provision to Ms Bâs daughter while she was out of school. It followed correct procedure and considered evidence properly before reaching its decision. When new evidence became available, it re-evaluated its position and began delivering alternative education; however, this education was not full-time, for which the Council was at fault. It has agreed to provide remedies for Ms Bâs daughterâs injustice. Hertfordshire County Council (23 020 740)
Summary: Mrs X complained about the way the Council managed her childâs move into post-16 education. Mrs X said this caused her distress and her child missed out on some of their special educational provision. We have found the Council at fault for not providing all the special educational needs provision after Mrs Xâs child started post-16 education and for the way it dealt with other aspects of her complaint. To remedy the injustice caused the Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X, make payments for the distress caused and loss of provision to Mrs Xâs child, and carry out some service improvements. Somerset Council (24 000 109)
Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council dealt with her sonâs education. The Council was at fault for failing to properly consider its section 19 duties and its delay in issuing Yâs education, health and care plan. This caused distress, frustration and uncertainty to Ms X and Y. The Council will make a payment to recognise this and make service improvements. Kent County Council (24 001 526)
Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council failed to provide suitable education for her son, Y. There was fault with the Councilâs actions. It was responsible for delays following a review of Yâs Education Health and Care plan, failed to properly consider whether it needed to make alternative arrangements for Yâs education and communicated with Mrs X poorly. This caused Mrs X avoidable worry, frustration and distress. The Council agreed to apologise, pay Mrs X a financial remedy and issue reminders to its staff. Herefordshire Council (24 001 758)
Summary: Ms F complained about how the Council handled her sonâs (Y) Education, Health, and Care plan process and how it communicated with her. We found the Council at fault for causing a six-month delay in the statutory process. It also failed to acknowledge and respond to much of her communication. In addition to its apology, it will make payment to Ms F to acknowledge the impact its faults caused. Somerset Council (24 003 126)
Summary: We have found fault with the Council for the delays Mr X experienced during his daughterâs (Yâs) Education, Health and Care Plan process and for failing to meet its Section 19 duties. This fault caused Y to miss out on education, SEN provision and the social benefits of a school environment. The Council has agreed to remedy Mr X and Yâs injustice. West Sussex County Council (24 003 934)
Summary: Mrs B complained the Council delayed in completing an education, health and care needs assessment for her child. We upheld the complaint, finding the delay caused injustice through a loss of education provision. The Council accepted these findings. At the end of this statement, we set out the action it has agreed to remedy that injustice. North Lincolnshire Council (24 005 359)
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed issuing her son, Yâs, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan and failed to provide alternative provision when he was unable to attend school between June 2023 and June 2024. The Council was at fault in delaying issuing Yâs EHC Plan and failing to consider if it should provide him alternative provision. The Council will apologise to Mrs X, pay her £3,150 to recognise the frustration and uncertainty caused to her and for the term of education and specialist provision Y did not receive. The Council will also remind staff of its duties to consider alternative provision and respond to complaints fully. Manchester City Council (24 005 672)
Summary: Miss X complains the council has failed to complete a reassessment of her son Y's, Education, Health and Care Plan and issue a new Education, Health and Care Plan within statutory timescales. Miss X says Y has missed provision due to his Education, Health and Care plan not meeting his needs. Miss X also says the Council failed to respond to her complaint within the timescale in its policy. Miss X says this has caused her and her family distress. We have found fault in the actions of the Council for failing to issue Yâs Education, Health and Care Plan within statutory timescales and for failing to respond to Miss Xâs complaint in line with its policy. We recommend the Council issues an apology, pays Miss X a financial payment and completes service improvements. Herefordshire Council (24 008 257)
Summary: Ms C complained about the Councilâs handling of the Education, Health, and Care plan process for her son (X) and his education when he stopped attending school. We found the Council at fault for failing to adhere to the statutory timescales, a delay in providing alternative provision for X, some poor communication, and failing to provide her with her appeal rights. In addition to the Councilâs apology, it will make payment to Ms C to acknowledge the injustice this caused her and X. Telford & Wrekin Council (24 013 751)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Councilâs decision not to provide post-16 transport to college. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. London Borough of Croydon (24 013 771)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how a child protection conference was held because doing so would not add to the investigation carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome. Reading Borough Council (24 013 997)
Summary: We will not investigate Miss Xâs complaint about the Councilâs refusal to provide free school transport for her child. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating. Essex County Council (24 014 700)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about 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. Dorset Council (24 014 760)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr Xâs complaint about the Councilâs decision to treat his childâs absences from school as unauthorised and to threaten prosecution because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. In addition, some of Mr Xâs complaints are late or about matters we have no jurisdiction to consider. City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (24 014 868)
Summary: We will not investigate Ms Xâs complaint about the conduct a school transport appeal panel. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the panel considered the appeal to warrant investigation by us. Lancashire County Council (23 018 632)
Summary: There was fault and service failure in failing to issue an Education, Health and Care Plan on time. This caused distress and uncertainty whether Y would have been able to remain on their college course if the Plan had been issued on time. The Council will apologise and make a symbolic payment to acknowledge the injustice caused. The complaint is upheld. Lancashire County Council (23 018 633)
Summary: There was delay by the Council in issuing a final Education, Health and Care Plan, and a failure to secure fulltime suitable education when a pupil could only attend school part-time. This caused loss of education, distress and inconvenience to the whole family. The Council will apologise, make symbolic payments and carry out service improvements. Staffordshire County Council (23 016 736)
Summary: The Council was at fault for reducing the social care support it offered to Miss X and her disabled son without warning. Before our involvement, it also accepted failings in how it carried out occupational therapy and carerâs assessments. It has agreed to provide Miss X with remedies for the injustice these matters caused her. However, it was not otherwise at fault for how it provided support to Miss Xâs son, or for how it dealt with her application for adaptations to her home. Kent County Council (24 013 862)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to properly investigate a complaint about the actions of its officer. This is because there is nothing significant to be gained by our intervention. Southampton City Council (24 016 064)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr Xâs complaint about the actions of the Councilâs Early Help Hub in 2021/2022. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late and there are no good grounds to exercise discretion to consider it now. London Borough of Tower Hamlets (24 017 708)
Summary: We will not investigate Ms Xâs complaint about the children social servicesâ handling of her case. She says the Council did not investigate her case appropriately, she received no support from the service, and that the reports and assessments completed by the social workers were inaccurate. This is because the Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused. Portsmouth City Council (24 013 755)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to make arrangements to ensure the provision of suitable education for the complainantâs daughter. We have no jurisdiction to consider the periods during which her right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) was engaged, and there are no grounds for us to question the Councilâs decision that it was not required to make alternative educational provision during the remaining period. Essex County Council (24 015 463)
Essex County Council (24 015 463) Sheffield City Council (24 016 042)
Summary: We will not investigate Ms Xâs complaint about the Councilâs handling of Mr Yâs transfer request to another college. This is because any fault has not caused a significant enough injustice to justify our involvement. Lancashire County Council (24 001 250)
Summary: The complainantâs father (Mr X) said the Council failed to deliver all special educational provision included in his daughterâs (Y) Education Health and Care Plan. Mr X, who represented Y in her dealings with the Council, also complained about the inadequate communication from the Council. We found fault with the Councilâs failure to deliver the full Education Otherwise than at School package included in Section F of Yâs plan and for its failings when responding to Mr Xâs request for a Personal budget for Y. We also found fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr Xâs complaint. The Councilâs fault caused injustice to Y and Mr X. The Council agreed to apologise, make symbolic payments for the loss of education and distress and carry out service improvements of its complaint handling. Hampshire County Council (24 001 414)
Summary: Mrs X complained about delays with her childâs education, health and care plan and poor communication. She said this caused unnecessary distress and delayed her childâs support. We find the Council at fault, and this caused injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X. Cheshire East Council (24 005 835)
Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to provide her child with suitable education and Section F provision from her childâs Education, Health and Care Plan since May 2023. We found fault with the Council delaying review of Ms Xâs child Education, Health and Care Plan by 18 weeks outside the statutory timescales. We also found fault with the Council failing to provide suitable education for Ms Xâs child and EHC Plan provision from 20 June 2023 to the end of the academic year 2023/2024. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X, pay her £250 for the frustration and uncertainty caused and £3,300 for her childâs missed education. West Northamptonshire Council (24 005 992)
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Councilâs alleged failure to provide her child, Y, with suitable education and alternative provision. There were some faults by the Council which caused injustice to Y and Mrs X. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused. Essex County Council (24 012 820)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about 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. Kingston Upon Hull City Council (24 013 117)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about home to school transport arrangements. We cannot investigate future injustice which has not yet happened. Somerset Council (24 013 402)
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs Xâs complaint about Education Health and Care Plan communication and related matters. The injustice caused by the alleged fault does not justify an investigation. Cambridgeshire County Council (23 018 216)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alleged data breach and associated matters. The Information Commissionerâs Office is better placed than us to consider complaints about data protection. Where the Information Commissionerâs Office has already considered a matter, it is best placed to make recommendations about data practices, and there is a right to go to court to seek compensation it would be reasonable to use. Investigating the remaining matter alone would not lead to any worthwhile outcome. Northumberland County Council (24 009 403)
Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed considering a complaint at stage two of the childrenâs statutory complaints procedure. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint by completing its investigation and issuing its stage two response without further delay. It will also offer to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the time and trouble they have been to. Somerset Council (24 009 824)
Summary: The Council failed to consider a Tribunal recommendation about social care provision within the required timescale; failed to put care support in place; delayed investigating the complaint, and when it did investigate, failed to consider a financial remedy for missed provision. As a result, Ms X and her family went without support and were caused unnecessary time and trouble. The Council will apologise, make a symbolic payment for missed provision and distress, and carry out service improvements. The complaint is upheld. Hartlepool Borough Council (24 012 969)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr Xâs complaint the Council did not include his views in a Childrenâs Social Care assessment. We could not add to the Councilâs investigation. Herefordshire Council (24 013 738)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an assessment carried out by the Council, and consequent restrictions on contact with children. The matters complained of relate to issues of contact a residence, which only a court could decide. It is or would therefore have been reasonable for Mr X or another member of the family to use their right to go to court to resolve contact and residence issues consequent from the assessment. Hertfordshire County Council (24 014 695)
Summary: We will not investigate Miss Xâs late complaint about the Councilâs refusal to consider her complaints relating to concerns about her children. This is because the action complained of formed part of court proceedings and could reasonably have been raised in court. We also will not consider the Councilâs complaint handling when we are not investigating the substantive matter. London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (24 016 599)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr Xâs complaint about the Councilâs actions in its child protection involvement with his child. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Councilâs decision not to consider his complaint whilst the matter is subject to ongoing court proceedings. Cornwall Council (24 017 780)
Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed considering a complaint at stage two of the childrenâs statutory complaints procedure. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint by issuing its stage two response without further delay. It will also apologise and offer to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the time and trouble they have been to. London Borough of Waltham Forest (24 012 623)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a compliance check process the Council operates to allow childminders to deliver the governmentâs free early education entitlement. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or injustice to Mrs X in completing the process to warrant our further involvement. City of Doncaster Council (24 012 097)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about problems with home to school transport. An investigation would not add anything to the Councilâs response or achieve a different outcome. |
