Education archive 2019-2020


Archive has 785 results

  • Devon County Council (19 017 780)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 23-Mar-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the educational provision made for the complainant’s son. This is because it is unlikely he would find fault by the Council in the arrangements it made with the complainant for her son’s education, and it has offered an appropriate remedy for other agreed faults.

  • Durham County Council (19 020 018)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 21-Mar-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that the Council was at fault in refusing her appeal for a school place for her daughter. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part.

  • Sheffield City Council (18 019 236)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 20-Mar-2020

    Summary: Mrs B complained about the way the Council dealt with her son’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. There was fault by the Council in failing to consult schools when Mrs B said she no longer wanted to educate her son at home. This led to delay in issuing a final EHC Plan with a named placement, which delayed the right of appeal. The Council has agreed a remedy for the loss of educational support and the impact on Mrs B of having to educate her son at home for longer than necessary.

  • Archbishop Temple School, Preston (19 008 743)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 20-Mar-2020

    Summary: Ms X complains of fault by the School in refusing a place in Year 7 for her son, Z, and of further fault in the appeal process that followed. There was no fault by the School.

  • Hartlepool Borough Council (19 012 283)

    Statement Upheld School transport 20-Mar-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council ended the school bus provision to her children’s school without consultation. The Council failed to inform parents of the changes, but this did not affect its decision to end the transport. It has agreed to apologise to Mrs X for the frustration this caused and to amend its procedures to ensure in future parents are consulted in a timely manner.

  • Hampshire County Council (19 000 149)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 19-Mar-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence to suggest Mrs C was told a change of school would be considered outside of the EHCP process. However, the Council were at fault for not responding to Mrs C’s correspondence and that this led to distress. The Council has agreed to make a payment to Mrs C to remedy this distress.

  • Somerset County Council (19 009 278)

    Statement Not upheld Special educational needs 19-Mar-2020

    Summary: Mrs M has found her dealings with the Council’s Special Educational Needs Service extremely frustrating. She could share her experiences with Ofsted during the next inspection. Mrs M is concerned about her son, B’s transfer to post-16 education. The Council must amend B’s Education, Health and Care Plan by 31 March if he is to transfer to college. It is too soon to consider her complaint about the transfer now.

  • Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (19 010 817)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 19-Mar-2020

    Summary: Miss X complains about the way the Council dealt with her appeal about a school place for her son. Miss X says this meant the appeal was not fair. She says this has caused stress, and her son struggles to attend his current school. The Ombudsman does not find the Council at fault.

  • Leeds City Council (19 014 104)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 19-Mar-2020

    Summary: there is no fault in the Appeal Panel’s decision not to admit Mr F’s son, B, to the school. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions taken without fault.

  • Derby City Council (19 018 717)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Alternative provision 19-Mar-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about a lack of education to her child between 2015 and 2018. There are no good reasons why the late complaint rule should not apply.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings