A weekly update on children and education complaint decisions

Summary: Ms X complains the Council delayed in reviewing her child D’s Education, Health, and Care Plan, and communicated poorly with the family. There was fault by the Council which caused avoidable distress to D and Ms X. It also delayed D in returning to an educational setting when they wanted to, following a period of Elective Home Education. The Council agreed to pay a financial remedy and re-allocate the family’s case to a different officer in its Special Educational Needs and Disabilities service. It will also share our decision with relevant staff for discussion and learning from the faults identified.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed in its duties to provide suitable education and Special Educational Needs support to her child, P. There was fault by the Council which caused P to miss education and SEN support. It also caused avoidable distress for P, and avoidable distress, time, and trouble for Mrs X. The Council agreed to apologise, pay a financial remedy, and properly consider Mrs X’s request for a Personal Budget for P’s Education, Health, and Care Plan. The Council will also review relevant processes, and issue reminders to staff in its Special Educational Needs Service and Children’s Complaints Team.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed in reviewing and amending her child D’s Education, Health, and Care Plan, and failed to respond to her complaint about this. There was fault by the Council which caused D to miss some support for their special educational needs. The fault also caused avoidable distress, time, and trouble for Mrs X. The Council agreed to apologise and pay a financial remedy. It will also identify any changes needed to its complaint handling process so it does not fail to respond to complaints in future.

Summary: Mrs X complains that her daughter Y, has not access to a full-time education in a setting that it able to meet her needs. We have concluded our investigation having made a finding of fault. The Council acknowledges fault where there was delay in arranging Y’s admission in July 2023. The Council also acknowledges fault for the period between October 2023 – February 2024, where Y was without alternative provision, nor access to a full-time education until a placement secured. The Council has proposed a remedy which we consider proportionate in the circumstances and has agreed to action this.

Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s failure to carry out an annual review within statutory timescales, and the delivery of Section H provision to her daughter, Y. Mrs X also complains about the Council’s decision to stop making personal budget payments directly to her. We intend to conclude our investigation having made a finding of fault. We found the Council failed to carry out an annual review when it should have, and failed to inform Mrs X it did not agree with the Tribunals’ recommendations. We did not find fault for the Council’s decision to stop making personal budget payments direct to Mrs X, and have not seen evidence that the Council’s decision impacted the delivery of provision to Y. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the time taken by the Council to issue a final Education, Health and Care Plan for her child following their annual reviews. As a result the child has not received the support they should have. To remedy the injustice caused the Council agreed to apologise, make payments to acknowledge the distress caused to Mrs X and the loss of her child’s special educational provision.

Summary: Mrs C complained about delays following an annual review of her son’s Education, Health and Care Plan. We found the Council was at fault. This caused Mrs C unnecessary distress and frustrated a possible appeal about the content of the plan. Mrs C was also put to unnecessary time and trouble in chasing the Council for a response to her complaint. The Council has accepted our recommendations for the action it should take to remedy this injustice.

Summary: We cannot investigate most of Mrs X’s complaint because she has appealed the Council’s decision not to conduct an Education, Health and Care needs assessment of her child to the SEND Tribunal. We will not investigate the remainder of the complaint because an investigation is unlikely to achieve a different outcome.

Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to provide a full-time education for her son, Y, when he was out of school for health reasons linked to his special educational needs, nor that it did not deliver the provision in his Education Health and Care Plan whilst he was out of school. This is because Ms X appealed the Council’s decision that the school place was suitable for Y and the missed provision could not be provided outside a school setting.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide alternative school transport arrangements for the complainant’s child. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the matter to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s actions during her child’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan annual review and the content of the final amended EHC Plan. This is because Mrs X has a right of appeal to a tribunal about the content of the amended EHC Plan and it is reasonable for her to use it. A complaint about the Council’s actions during the annual review process is connected to and could form part of an appeal, so we cannot investigate this.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s conduct during an appeal to the SEND Tribunal. The law prevents us from investigating complaints about the actions of a council during a tribunal appeal.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint because it lies outside our jurisdiction. The law prevents us from investigating complaints about matters that have been, or are being, considered in court proceedings. We have no discretion to do so.

Summary: Mrs Y complains on behalf of Miss X about the way in which the Council managed her family’s move into the Council’s area in April 2023. She said that because of the Council’s failures the family suffered avoidable distress and the children missed education and crucial social services support. We found the Council was at fault in how the Council managed the social care and special education needs support for the family. The Council agreed to our recommendations on what it should do to remedy the injustice its actions caused Miss X and her family.

Summary: Miss X complains about missed education, and the Council’s actions in failing to find a suitable full-time placement for Y. We have concluded our investigation having made a finding of fault. The Council failed to ensure Y received a full-time education from May 2022 – April 2024. Further, we found fault for a period of inaction in sourcing a placement for Y between March 2023 – May 2023. As Miss X has appealed to the Tribunal, any further complaint regarding the Council’s actions in sourcing a placement for Y are out of our jurisdiction. The Council has proposed a remedy in acknowledgement of fault and injustice identified in this complaint and we consider the Council’s offer to be fair and proportionate in the circumstances.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the delay in receiving remedies the Council agreed to pay to her and her son, S, in August 2021. The Council was at fault. It did not realise it had not completed the actions it committed to in August 2021 until Mrs X made her complaint. It also did not have a personal budget procedure in place which delayed the payments. This caused Mrs X and S injustice and at the end of this decision statement we recommend what actions the Council should take to put things right.

Summary: Mrs Y disagrees with the Council’s decision to refuse to provide transport assistance for her son, F, to attend the college named in his Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan. She says F attends the nearest suitable college to his home address, but the Council says there is one closer. We find the Council failed to explain the implications of naming Mrs Y’s preferred college in F’s EHC plan. We also find the Council failed to properly consider whether the other college offered a course at the required level for F. The Council will implement the remedial actions listed at the end of this statement.

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

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about special education provision. This is because Mrs X has already appealed to a Tribunal about the Council’s decisions here, and her complaint is not separable from the matters the Tribunal will consider.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s actions during his child’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan annual review and the content of the final amended EHC Plan. This is because Mr X has a right of appeal to a tribunal about the content of the amended EHC Plan and it is reasonable for him to use it. A complaint about the Council’s actions during the annual review process is connected to and could form part of an appeal, so we cannot investigate this.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide alternative education provision for Miss X’s son. This is because Miss X appealed the Council’s decision not to issue an Education, Health, and Care Plan and the substance of her complaint is not separable from her appeal. Nor will we investigate her complaint about any delays in the Council giving her this decision, because there is not a significant enough injustice to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the school named in an Education, Health and Care Plan. This is because it is reasonable for the complainant 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 decision her children do not qualify for free home to school transport. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

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 its decision.

Summary: Mrs Y complains on behalf of Miss X about the way in which the Council managed her family’s move out the Council’s area in April 2023. She said that because of the Council’s failures the family suffered avoidable distress and the children missed out on education and crucial social services support. We found the Council was at fault for the delay in transferring some of the educational documents to the new Council and the delay in holding a transfer meeting. The Council agreed to our recommendations on what it should do to remedy the injustice its actions caused Miss X and her family.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s communication with her about her child’s education and welfare, its response to her report of safeguarding concerns and its failure to enforce a court order. There is insufficient evidence of fault and the courts are better placed to resolve any dispute about where Ms X’s child lives.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about children services’ actions. We have upheld Ms X’s complaint as the Council has now agreed to follow the Children Act statutory complaints’ procedure.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the contents of a report. This is because a court ordered the report and therefore it’s preparation and contents fall outside of our jurisdiction

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement with Miss X’s sibling’s children. The complaint is about matters that have been subject to court proceedings, which the law prevents us considering.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council made changes to the support in place for two children. This is because further investigation would not add to the investigation carried out by the Council.

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to comply with an order of the SEND Tribunal and related matters. We have found the Council to be at fault. It took too long to issue an Education, Health and Care Plan that reflected an order by the SEND Tribunal and that included a personal budget. There was also fault with the way it handled Ms X’s complaint. To remedy the injustice to Ms X, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment and take action to improve its service.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to deliver the provisions in his daughter's Education, Health and Care Plan; poor communication and said the Council failed to carry out an annual review in 2023. We find the Council was at fault. This caused significant distress to Mr X and his daughter went without provision. The Council has agreed to make several recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council handled her daughter’s Education, Health and Care Plan annual review and a request to change school placement. We have found the Council at fault for delays during the annual review process. This caused Mrs X and her daughter avoidable distress.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to secure all the special educational provision in her child, Z’s, Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council was at fault for not securing some of Z’s provision, for delay in reviewing Z’s Plan, poor communication and inadequate complaints handling. This meant Z missed out on education they should have had, and Mrs X experienced frustration and upset and had to go to undue time and trouble. To remedy their injustice, the Council will apologise to Mrs X and pay her a total of £3,800.

Summary: We did not find fault with the Council in how it approached its duties for the complainant’s (Mrs X) son (Y) when Y stopped attending school. We cannot investigate whether the Council arranged suitable alternative provision for Y and delivered his special educational provision from the date of issuing Y’s final Education Health and Care Plan in March 2023. Mrs X appealed Sections B, F and I of this plan and the matters complained about are too closely linked with the appeal.

Summary: We found fault on Ms B’s complaint about the Council failing to consider and decide her request for an Education, Health and Care needs assessment for her daughter C within statutory timescales. The 20-week timescale was missed by seven months. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Summary: There was fault by the Council, because it did not properly discharge its duty to arrange alternative provision for a child who was not attending school. It is not possibly to state clearly what material difference this made, but we consider it caused frustration and distress to the complainant and child. The Council has agreed to offer a financial remedy to account for this, and to formally apologise.

Summary: There was delay in updating an Education, Health and Care Plan in time for a transition from school to college; a failure to specify and quantify provision in the Plan; a failure to check special educational provision was in place; and a failure to complete agreed complaint actions. This caused unnecessary distress and let to a young adult missing out on education support at a crucial stage of their transition to adult life. The Council will apologise, work with the family to resolve the problems with the Plan, make a financial payment and carry out service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about communication and speech and language therapy payments for Miss X’s child. It now seems likely the Council resolved these matters before Miss X approached us. Further investigation by us would be unlikely to lead to a different or better outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council conducted an Education, Health, and Care Plan annual review, or how it responded to a request for a personal budget. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault for us to question the panel’s decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about school admissions. This is because we have no powers to investigate complaints about academy schools.

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 cannot investigate this complaint about the contents of an assessment. This is because the matter is currently being considered by the courts.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with matters concerning a safeguarding matter. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about alleged abuse of Mr X’s child and victimisation of him by social workers. The matters complained of are not separable from matters that have been or could reasonably be raised in court.

Summary: We cannot by law investigate this complaint about matters the complainant says adversely affected her son’s wellbeing while he was in foster care. This is because the issues raised by the complainant have already been considered and decided on by a court during the course of care proceedings.

Summary: We cannot by law investigate this complaint about the Council’s child protection assessment which informed the a court decision to remove the complainant’s child from his care. This is because the issues raised are subject to active legal proceedings and relate to decisions made by the court.

Summary: The Council took too long to issue the final Education Health and Care Plan for Mr D’s son. It did not include Mr D in the production of the Plan and did not consider his comments on the draft Plan. The child was only able to access part time tuition during this time. The Council did not respond to many of Mr D’s requests for help and took too long to deal with his complaint to it. The Council has offered to remedy the injustice to Mr D and his son, and this is in line with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council took too long to issue an Education, Health and Care Plan for her client’s daughter, Z. We found fault because there was a significant delay in issuing Z’s plan. This caused avoidable distress and uncertainty for Z and her father, Mr Y. To remedy the injustice caused by this fault, the Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr Y.

Summary: There was fault by the Council in how it dealt with an application for school transport. It did not take account of the statutory guidance and its policy does not reflect this. The Council took too long to convene the appeal panel and did not call him during the hearing as promised. The Council’s failings have caused the parent distress, uncertainty, and frustration. The Council has agreed to remedy this.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alternative educational provision for Miss X’s child. We are legally prevented from investigating what educational provision should have been made for the child after the Council issued a new Education Health and Care Plan that Miss X appealed against, and any period before then is too short for the Council to have had an alternative education duty.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s communication with Miss X relating to her son’s transition to a new school. The Council have considered Miss X’s complaint and further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about the lack of education. We cannot investigate issues which were or could have been part of a Tribunal Appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of a social worker before Miss X’s son travelled to another area alone without permission. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our further involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about information about the complainant’s child contained in a report produced by the Council. This is because our intervention would achieve nothing significant.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement in Mr X’s child’s case. The matter is being considered by the courts, and we are therefore prevented in law from investigating it.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement in Ms X’s child’s case. The law prevents us investigating complaints about what happened in court, and we have no power to overturn a court decision and return Ms X’s child to her care.

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 a school transport incident in dropping off Mrs X’s child at her home address, and in suspending her child’s school transport. While the incident was fault, there was fortunately no harm to the child. The Council was also entitled to suspend the child’s school transport at short notice due to the nature of the reported incidents. Investigation is therefore unlikely to lead to a different or better outcome than that resulting from the Council’s own investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a Council’s school admissions appeal panel’s decision as it is unlikely we would find fault.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council have not dealt with her son Y’s Special Educational Needs (SEN) properly. The Council did not complete an annual review properly, delayed responding to Mrs X’s complaint and did not fully complete recommendations arising from its complaint response. Mrs X had her right of appeal delayed, received a late complaint response and did not receive the full remedy agreed in the Council’s complaint response. The Council should apologise, pay Mrs X £400 for distress and uncertainty, provide an action plan and refer this decision to the Cabinet Member responsible.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to provide special educational needs provision for her child D in line with their Education, Health, and Care Plan. There was fault by the Council which caused D to miss provision and caused financial loss to Mrs X because she paid for some provision herself. The Council’s fault also caused avoidable distress for D, and avoidable distress, time, and trouble for Mrs X. The Council agreed to apologise, pay a financial remedy, and review relevant processes.

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s delays with decision making in respect of her son’s Education, Health and Care Plan after a review. We found the Council at fault for significant delays. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We have found fault with the Council for how it handled Mrs X’s son (Y) post-16 education transfer. The Council delayed the Education Health Care Plan review, did not consider its Section 19 duty, and did not deliver alternative education provision while Y was waiting for a suitable post-16 placement. This fault caused Y to miss out on education and special educational need provision. It also delayed Mrs X’s appeal rights and caused the whole family avoidable distress.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council refused to provide her son, Y, with school transport. Mrs X explained Y has additional needs, attends a special school and it was unsafe for him to walk to school. She said this caused Y and her distress because Y’s behaviours mean he is at risk of running towards vehicles when walking near a road. There was fault in the way the Council did not properly consider Mrs X’s application and Y’s needs. Mrs X was frustrated by this fault. The Council should apologise, make a financial payment, review the application and provide training to relevant staff.

Summary: Ms M complains about delays by the Council arranging the special educational provision in her daughter G’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. We are satisfied the Council responded appropriately to Ms M’s complaint.

Summary: Mrs D complained the Council failed to provide the provision in Mr E's Education, Health and Care Plan. We find the Council was at fault for its delays in putting the provision in place. The Council has agreed to our recommendation to address the injustice caused by fault.

Summary: The complainant (Mrs X) said the Council had failed to comply with the statutory timescales for an Education Health and Care needs assessment for her son (Y) and had failed within its communication with her. We found fault in the Council’s delays and communication. This fault caused Y and Mrs X injustice. The Council agreed to apologise and make payments to recognise distress.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has excluded the complainant from involvement with his daughter’s case and has declined to accept his subsequent complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions prior to and during care proceedings. This is because the law prevents us from investigating the start of court proceedings and what happened in court.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to ensure her son, Y, received all the provision and support set out in his Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The Council delayed putting Speech and Language Therapy provision in place by around two weeks following a SEND tribunal order. It agreed to make a payment to Ms X to acknowledge that missed provision. It took appropriate steps to ensure the other support was in place. The Council was also at fault for a delay in sending its written communication plan after implementing a single point of contact for Ms X. It has already apologised for this, which is appropriate.