London Borough of Redbridge (08 017 856)
Special educational needs Maladministration causing injustice
6 August 2009
The London Borough of Redbridge failed to provide specialist occupational therapy for a boy as required by his statement of special educational needs. The Ombudsman said: “The difficulties it encountered in recruiting someone due to changes in employment rules do not absolve the Council of its duty in this regard.”
‘Mr and Mrs Cotton’ (not their real names for legal reasons) complained that the Council failed to ensure that occupational therapy was provided for their son, ‘Andrew’, as specified in his statement of special educational needs.
The Ombudsman found maladministration causing injustice in that the Council:
- failed to provide sessions for Andrew with a specialist occupational therapist (OT) within the timeframe set out in his statement; and
- failed to make the OT provision that the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal (SENDIST) considered necessary.
Mr and Mrs Cotton were distressed by these failures, and had to take considerable time and trouble in chasing the Council repeatedly to find out what was happening. They said that, as a result of the delay in getting the provision set out in his statement, Andrew had regressed in the development of his life skills, and that his life chances had been affected.
Remedy
To remedy the injustice to Andrew and his parents, the Ombudsman recommended that the Council:
- ensured that sessions for Andrew with a new specialist OT started in September 2009 with his new regular OT in attendance;
- paid Mr and Mrs Cotton £1,000 compensation for the injustice caused to Andrew;
- paid them £250 for their distress; and
- paid them £250 to reflect their time and trouble.
LGO satisfied with Council's response: 9 November 2009
Date Updated: 10/12/09