Summary: We cannot investigate a school or the police’s investigation into a safeguarding incident. We will not investigate the Council’s consideration of the incident as it is unlikely we would find the faults he alleges would have changed the Council’s consideration outcome. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council had failed to provide a suitable education as it is unlikely we would find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council’s children’s safeguarding team failed to properly investigate an incident inside a school. And he says the Council failed to provide a suitable education to his child, Y.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate most complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(2), as amended)
3. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about action taken by or on behalf of any local policing body in connection with the investigation or prevention of crime. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, Section 26, paragraph 2 as amended)
4. 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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X which includes the Council’s replies to him.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X says in June 2025 a teacher assaulted and shouted at his child, Y at School Z. He reported this to the Police, School Z and the Council. He says it was not properly investigated. He says following the incident Y could not attend School Z. He says the Council then failed to provide Y with a suitable education as required to do so under s19 Education Act 1996.
8. We cannot investigate School Z or the Police investigations.
9. Mr X says the Council’s safeguarding consideration was not satisfactory. He says they should have spoken with Y. The Council closed the case on the basis the allegation was unfounded. Given Mr X’s description of the incident it is unlikely our investigation would decide the outcome would be any different if further investigation had happened.
10. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that councils must arrange suitable alternative educational provision when it finds that a child cannot attend school because of a permanent exclusion, an illness, or for any other reason which make the school inaccessible to the child.
11. Mr X says Y cannot attend School Z, but says he wants a place at School Q. S19 only applies if a child cannot attend any school. Our investigation is therefore unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision that it does not owe a s19 duty.

Back to top

Final decision

We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about a school or the police investigation. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Council safeguarding investigation as it is unlikely we would find the faults he alleges could have made a difference to the outcome. We will not investigate an allegation of s19 failure as it is unlikely we would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman