Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alleged failings of safeguarding and educational provision when the Council was providing Mrs X’s child with home tuition. Investigation would be unlikely to lead to any robust conclusions or achieve a worthwhile outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs X said a home tutor employed by the Council in 2022 spent time dealing with his own tasks rather than making the educational provision needed by her child. She said her child was groomed online. She also said the Council failed to deal properly with her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
 

3. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The matters alleged happened in 2022 when Mrs X’s child was receiving home tuition. The Council’s complaint responses stated it was not possible to reach a clear view whether the tutor was attempting to engage the child or carrying out his own work while waiting for the child to be able to engage. They also stated it could not be determined whether any contact made by the child with a groomer was during a time when tuition should have been taking place.
7. Detailed computer records have not been produced by either party. More than two years after the event, and given they were the tutor’s property, it is unlikely we could conduct a robust investigation that would reach a clear view.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because investigation by us would be unlikely to lead to a clear finding about fault or achieve a better or different outcome than that produced by the Council’s own investigation.
9. As we are bot investigating the substantive matter, it would not be a good use of resources to investigate howe the Council dealt with Mrs X’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman