London Borough of Waltham Forest (19 011 491)

Statement Upheld School admissions 28-Feb-2020

Summary: Ms B complains about the conduct of a school admission appeals panel. The Ombudsman finds there was fault in the record keeping at the hearing which calls into question its decision-making. The Council agreed to the Ombudsman’s recommendation for a fresh appeal with a different panel and clerk, but Ms B rejected this offer as her child is now settled in their new school. The Council agreed to remind appeal panel clerks of the importance of keeping a full and accurate record of the points made at the hearing and full reasons for the panel’s decision, and of the requirement for the retention of such records.

Westminster City Council (19 016 784)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 28-Feb-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to reimburse Mrs X’s costs incurred as part of a Tribunal hearing. This is because the complainant could have applied to the Tribunal for costs and it would have been reasonable to expect her to do so.

Staffordshire County Council (18 011 415)

Statement Not upheld Special educational needs 28-Feb-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman has decided to stop investigating this complaint about the Council’s decision to reduce the amount it will pay for Mrs X’s son to have Speech and Language Therapy. During our investigation, the Council agreed to continue paying for Mrs X’s son to see the same Speech and Language Therapist. This was the outcome sought by Mrs X, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Worcestershire County Council (18 012 656)

Statement Upheld School transport 28-Feb-2020

Summary: There was fault by the Council in deciding a child’s transport eligibility on mobility and safety grounds without assessing the child’s needs or getting the evidence necessary to make a sound decision. This was fault and caused the family unnecessary distress, expense and inconvenience before the Council reversed its decision. The complaint is upheld. Recommendations for an apology, financial payment and service improvements are made.

Medway Council (19 006 311)

Statement Not upheld School transport 28-Feb-2020

Summary: Mrs C says the Council should pay for her son X’s school transport. She says its failure to do so caused her expense. The Council is not at fault. Its decision is in line with the law and government guidance.

Somerset County Council (19 018 406)

Statement Upheld Special educational needs 27-Feb-2020

Summary: Miss X complains her son, Z, has suffered injustice as a result of delay by the Council found in a previous investigation. A SEND Tribunal has now decided Z’s needs and it is clear he missed out on provision. Miss X also lost the opportunity to benefit earlier from provision ordered after a delayed assessment. The Council will apologise and pay Miss X £600.

Bristol City Council (19 014 236)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 27-Feb-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about an Education Health and Care Plan the Council produced for her child. She appealed to the Tribunal and we cannot investigate issues appealed to the Tribunal.

Warrington Council (19 009 774)

Statement Upheld School transport 27-Feb-2020

Summary: The Council applied the wrong tests when deciding an application for home-to-school transport, which is fault. It has agreed to review its decision in light of this. Until the review is complete, it is not possible to decide whether the fault caused an injustice to the complainant. However, the Council has also agreed to review its handling of other recent similar applications, to identify any where it has made the same errors.

Royal Borough of Greenwich (19 016 683)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 26-Feb-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about problems with the Council’s IT systems used for appeals against the refusal of admission to a school. This is because there is insufficient evidence of significant injustice caused by the Council.

Kent County Council (19 000 955)

Statement Upheld Special educational needs 26-Feb-2020

Summary: There is fault in Kent County Council’s handling of Mr B’s son’s educational provision and meeting his special educational needs under an Education, Health and Care Plan. This fault has resulted in injustice. The Council will take the agreed action, which includes making an apology and a payment, to recognise and remedy this injustice and will also review its practice and procedures to improve future services