Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council delayed arranging education for her son after his school placement ended, and wrongly took recovery action against her when some of the money for her son’s care went missing. We cannot comment on Mrs X’s liability for the missing money, as this may well be dealt with in court. But we have found that the Council was otherwise at fault. It delayed arranging education for Mrs X’s son and caused delays in its recovery of the missing money. It has now agreed to take action to remedy the injustice caused to Mrs X and her son.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains that there was a delay arranging educational provision for her son, Y, after his school placement ended in March 2024. She says his tuition and other support did not start until June 2024.
2. Mrs X also complains that the Council has wrongly accused her of misusing Y’s care funds. She says that, although she has explained to the Council how the money was spent, it still decided to start recovery action.
3. Mrs X says she and Y have been caused distress, and Y has lost education. She wants the Council to end its recovery action and pay her compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. If there was no fault in how the council made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
6. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
7. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
8. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Delay to education

Law and guidance

11. Councils must arrange suitable education for children who are out of school because of exclusion, illness or for other reasons, if they would not receive suitable education without such arrangements (Education Act 1996, section 19). We refer to this as ‘alternative provision’.

What happened

12. In early 2024, Y’s social worker told the Council’s education team that Y would be moving to a new residential school in early March. The education team gave Y’s notice to Y’s existing school.
13. In late March, Y’s social worker told the Council’s education team that Y would now not, in fact, be moving schools, and would continue to need his place at his existing school. But his place was no longer available.
14. In mid-April, the Council held a meeting to review Y’s social care support. Its education team agreed to provide a tutor for Y and two carers to support him while he was being taught.
15. The Council identified two providers who (in the Council’s words) “were unwilling to work with the family due to previous experiences”. And Mrs X said she would prefer that a third – which already provided some social care support to the family – were not used.
16. The Council contacted several other agencies, but none were available to deliver Y’s support.
17. In mid-May, Mrs X agreed to use the agency which was already supporting Y. The Council began delivering his tuition and carer support in June.
18. Mrs X complained to the Council about how it had handled Y’s school transfer and his subsequent educational provision. It responded, saying:
• It accepted that the problems with Y’s school transfer would have caused him, and Mrs X, distress. It offered Mrs X £50 to recognise this.
• Y was receiving interim educational provision while longer-term arrangements were made. This amounted to a combination of home tuition, social activities and carer support at a two-to-one staff-to-child ratio. Night-time and school holiday support was also in place.
• It had sent placement requests to nine residential schools and was awaiting feedback.
19. As of March 2025, Y continued to receive a full-time package of tuition, independence skills, swimming and other alternative provision. Two-to-one carer support remained in place.

My findings

20. After Y’s move to a residential school fell through, he was left without education. This meant the Council was under a duty to make alternative arrangements.
21. The Council acted quickly to discuss putting education in place for Y. But it struggled to find a care agency which could (or would) deliver the two-to-one support, and Y went without education for around two months.
22. ‘Service failure’ can still happen when a council fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed procedure or bad faith by a council to say service failure has occurred.
23. In Y’s case, it was the Council’s duty to make suitable education available to him. And, despite its efforts, it did not do so. Although this may not have been entirely within its control, this remains a service failure, for which it was at fault.
24. Y suffered a loss of education, which caused him an injustice. Below, I have made a recommendation to this Council to address this.

Direct payments

The Council’s policies and procedures

25. The Council says that, if it believes care funds have been misused, it will firstly ask for them to be repaid. It will also consider taking other action, such as restricting the person’s access to further funds.
26. The Council’s direct payment policy says that, if it suspects deliberate misuse of funds, this may trigger a fraud investigation by the Council, or a criminal investigation by the Police. The Council may also start court proceedings to recover the money.

What happened

27. In January 2023, the Council noticed that £11k had left Y’s direct payment account. It had been transferred into an account in the name of Mrs X’s partner.
28. In February, Y’s social worker visited Mrs X to discuss this. Mrs X said it was an error. She said her partner had initially denied receiving the money, before telling her he had invested it and could not get it back. She said did not know what had happened and asked to pay the money back in instalments.
29. Y’s social worker also spoke to Mrs X’s partner. He also said he had invested the money – despite not knowing where it came from – and asked to pay it back in instalments. He did, however, agree to provide the Council with bank statements so it could see where the money had gone. He also agreed to ask his bank if the money could be returned.
30. The Council chased both Mrs X and her partner for a response from the bank four times over the following two months. It received no response (or bank statements). In mid-March, the Council told Mrs X that it had referred the matter to its fraud department.
31. The day after, Mrs X asked the Council if she could make an initial repayment of £2k. She said this had been a genuine mistake and she did not want to get in trouble. She said her and her partner were prepared to pay the money back. Y’s social worker told Mrs X that she would forward this request to her managers.
32. Shortly after this, Y’s social worker went on maternity leave. No payment was received from Mrs X, and the Council did not pursue the recovery for several months.
33. In January 2024 (by which point Mrs X’s relationship with her partner had ended), the Council held a meeting to discuss recovering the money from her. It agreed to send her an invoice for the full amount.
34. The Council then sent Mrs X an invoice, which was discussed with her during a home visit. Mrs X said she accepted she was “liable for this mess”, but then also claimed the Council was acting unlawfully (without specifying how).
35. In May, having received no payment, the Council sent a final payment notice to Mrs X. She asked that this notice be put on hold, saying she had provided details to Y’s social worker of how the money had been spent. She said she was not liable for the repayment.
36. The Council’s finance team forwarded Mrs X’s email to Y’s social worker (and others) and asked for clarification. The Council’s social care service confirmed that Mrs X “remain[ed] liable for this amount”. It did not explain this decision or refer to any new information provided by Mrs X.
37. Mrs X was unhappy with this, and she told the Council that it had decided she was liable for the debt “without any proper investigation”. She submitted a complaint, saying she had already repaid the money over the previous 13 months by paying for Y’s equipment and home adaptations.
38. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint, saying she was a signatory of the direct payment agreement and was responsible for how the money was spent – which should have been on Y’s care package. Instead, it was transferred to
    Mrs X’s partner’s account, and it is not clear what happened after that.
39. The Council told Mrs X that, if she did not start paying the money back by the end of August 2024, it would seek legal advice.

My findings

40. The Ombudsman has no role in deciding whether Mrs X misused Y’s care funds. This is a decision only the Council can make on the facts of the case.
41. The Council’s policy also says that the next step in its recovery of the money involves going to court. This is a process with which the Ombudsman cannot interfere.
42. For these two reasons, I have not made a judgment on the merits of either party’s position. I can only consider the Council’s administration of the recovery process.
43. Having considered the evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council, I have found that the Council was at fault. This is because:
• There was a significant period (around nine months) during which no action was taken.
• Although – after this nine-month delay – the Council decided Mrs X should repay all the money, this matter remains unresolved (around 18 months later). The Council’s finance team is (or was, in June 2025) still awaiting information from its social care service.
44. It is likely that these delays have contributed to complications in the case (including the development of Mrs X’s view that she has now at least partly repaid the missing money).
45. I have made recommendations to address the injustice caused to Mrs X, which now follow.

Back to top

Action

46. Within four weeks, the Council has agreed to arrange an internal meeting between its social care service and its finance team (and, if necessary, its legal team) to decide the next steps in its recovery of Y’s missing care funds. The meeting will include a decision on any information Mrs X has provided to the Council claiming she has at least partly repaid the missing money.
47. Within the same time frame, the Council has agreed to make a symbolic payment of £500 to Mrs X, on behalf of Y, to recognise the delay in arranging education for Y after his move to residential school fell through.
48. Within six weeks, the Council has agreed to write to Mrs X:
• Apologising for the long delays in the recovery process.
• Telling her what recovery action will happen next.
• Explaining its decision on her liability for the debt, with reference to any information she may have provided since 2024 which claims she has at least partly repaid the missing money.
49. The Council will provide us with evidence it has done these things.

Back to top

Decision

50. The Council was at fault. This caused injustice to Mrs X and Y, which the Council will now take action to address.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman