Summary: We will not investigate most of Miss X’s complaints about how the Council considered a safeguarding referral relating to her child’s teacher because there is insufficient evidence of fault. We will not investigate some of the complaints because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met. We cannot investigate part of the complaint because it relates to the internal management of a school.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council failed to:
1. properly investigate and act on her concerns about the actions of a teacher in relation to her child, Y, via its Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO);
2. respond to her referral to the LADO and subsequently acknowledged it lost her email submission.
2. Miss X said the matter caused her distress and frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate most complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(2), as amended)
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Background

8. In March 2025 Miss X said a teacher from her child’s school acted in a way that caused Y harm. This included a physical intervention. Miss X communicated with Y’s school about the matter but was unable to resolve the issues directly.
9. In May 2025 both Miss X and the school submitted information to the Council’s LADO about the matter. The LADO spoke with the school and determined the issue did not meet threshold for a LADO referral or strategy meeting. The LADO advised the school to manage the issues under its own processes.
10. Miss X complained the Council failed to respond to her referral. She said the Council did not obtain CCTV evidence of the incident and failed to consider Y’s disabilities as part of its processes.
11. In response the Council checked its systems and informed Miss X it could not find a referral to its services from her. It advised Miss X to provide additional information to enable it to identify the reason it did not receive the referral. It also apologised.
12. The Council also considered Miss X’s complaint about the LADO’s decision making. It said Y’s school spoke with Y, the teacher involved, and an independent third party. The accounts provided were consistent enough to enable the LADO to make a decision that a referral for a strategy meeting was not warranted.

Assessment

LADO Decision

13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the LADO’s decision not to investigate her concerns about the actions of a teacher. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. The LADO considered the information available and determined the issues raised did not meet its threshold.
14. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.
15. The Council obtained pertinent information and sufficient reports about what occurred before making its decision. There is insufficient evidence of fault. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

School involvement

16. Many of Miss X’s complaints relate to the actions of a teacher. The Council’s LADO referred the issue back to the school to manage under its own policies.
17. The Ombudsman cannot investigate the issues relating to Y’s school because the law says we cannot. If Miss X is dissatisfied with the actions of the school, it is open to her to complain to the school under its complaints process.

Loss of Miss X’s LADO referral

18. Although Miss X said the Council lost her LADO referral, the Council offered to explore the reasons why the referral was not received to determine the cause. It also apologised for any uncertainty caused and explained its decision making.
19. We will not investigate this complaint. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to engage with the Council’s request for information about the referral she made so it can identify the reason the referral was not received. The Council also apologised for the matter. An investigation by us is unlikely to active anything further.
20. Although Miss X may have been caused some uncertainty by this issue, the outcome is likely to have been the same in any case. This is because the Council considered her information as part of its complaints process but this did not change the outcome. Therefore, the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.
21. Finally, although Miss X felt the LADO made a decision without considering her information, the Council did consider the issues she raised as part of its complaints handling. It determined the issues would still not meet its threshold for intervention. There is insufficient evidence of fault in that decision making to warrant an investigation, and so we will not.

Back to top

Final decision

22. We will not investigate part of Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault. We cannot investigate part of the complaint because it relates to the internal management of a school. We will not investigate the remainder because an investigation is unlikely to achieve anything further.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman