Special educational needs


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Cornwall Council (17 001 831)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 17-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Council was at fault when it said that it would not consider Mrs B's complaint under the statutory children's complaints process. It has now agreed to investigate Mrs B's complaint at stage two.

  • London Borough of Hackney (16 014 255)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 17-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Council delayed completing the process of assessing Y's special educational needs but this did not cause injustice. The educational provision made following Y's permanent exclusion from school was not entirely full time but was tailored to meet Y's particular and very challenging behavioural needs so the reduced provision does not therefore amount to fault.

  • Cheshire East Council (16 017 762)

    Statement Not upheld Special educational needs 10-Jul-2017

    Summary: There was no fault in the way the Council carried out a mediation meeting. There is also no evidence the Council commented on Mr and Mrs X's role in their daughter's poor school attendance. I have not investigated Mr and Mrs X's complaint about information presented to the Council's panel as they had a right to appeal the panel's decision

  • Cheshire East Council (16 015 042)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 10-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Council did not send Mr and Mrs X documentation for its annual review of their daughter, Z's statement in 2014. It did not hold an annual review of Z's statement in 2015. These faults means Mr and Mrs X could not appeal to SEND. The Council did not transfer Z's statement to an Education and Health Care Plan within the required timescale. It has already apologised for this delay but has still not finalised her plan. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr and Mrs X, make a payment and finalise Z's EHCP. It has also agreed to review its records to assess whether others have missed out on an annual review.

  • London Borough of Haringey (17 002 875)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 07-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr J's complaint for Mr K and Ms L about the actions of a primary school, and about involving the Council in the school's handling of arrangements to support Mr K's and Ms L's son's special educational needs. The complaint is about actions within a school which were not part of the Council's statutory responsibilities but those of the school itself.

  • St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (16 012 992)

    Statement Not upheld Special educational needs 04-Jul-2017

    Summary: Miss X had a right of appeal to Tribunal regarding the Council's refusal to provide her son with an Education and Health Care Plan. This is linked to the Council's decision that Miss X's son does not meet the criteria for a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. As Miss X had a right of appeal to Tribunal the Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint further.

  • Surrey County Council (16 010 866)

    Statement Not upheld Special educational needs 03-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Council acknowledged there was a delay in finding a suitable school placement for Ms X's son B, but it was entitled to name an interim placement in the Education and Health Care Plan. It put in place the provision specified in the interim plan. The complaint is not upheld.

  • Leicestershire County Council (17 000 676)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 29-Jun-2017

    Summary: There is no good reason to investigate Mrs X's complaint further as a SEND Tribunal has decided the provision in her son's EHC Plan.

  • Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (16 016 084)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 28-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Council failed to investigate Mrs X's complaints about a lack of support in maintaining her child's education under a care order. The Ombudsman has recommended the Council investigate the complaint. There was no fault in the transport the Council provided to Mrs X's son to get him to school.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (17 001 595)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 26-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mrs B's complaint that a delay in finalising her son's EHCP has caused the Council to take legal proceedings against her for school non-attendance. We cannot investigate the commencement or conduct of Court action.

;