Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to investigate his concerns that his son did not receive adequate education. He says the Council’s actions have caused significant harm to his son’s development. I have ended our investigation because Mr X’s substantive complaint falls outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to investigate his concerns that his son did not receive adequate education while he was in the care of his mother. Mr X says the Council’s actions caused significant harm to his son’s development. Mr X would like the Council to provide him with a financial remedy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. We cannot investigate complaints relating to the commencement or conduct of civil or criminal proceedings before any court of law. (Local Government Act 1974, schedule 5 (1)).
3. 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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

4. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

7. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
8. Mr X complained to the Council in December 2024. Mr X said his son was below the age-appropriate level of speaking, and for this reason, he considered his son had not received appropriate education while in the care of his mother.
9. The Council replied to Mr X that same month.
10. Mr X contacted the Council again in May 2025. He said the Council was neglectful as it had not responded to his urgent complaint. Mr X clarified that his complaint was regarding his child’s home education review. Mr X also raised safeguarding concerns about his children while in the care of their mother.
11. The Council replied and said the issues raised were the subject of court proceedings and it was therefore unable to consider Mr X’s complaint. The Council said however, it had passed Mr X’s concerns to the relevant service team for them to consider.
12. Mr X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response and brought his complaint to the Ombudsman.

What happened next

13. The Council provided its final complaint response in June 2025. It said the Council was unable to consider Mr X’s complaint because Mr X and his family were the subject of court proceedings. The Council suggested that Mr X discuss his concerns with his solicitor who could provide advice and bring any matters to the attention of the Judge. The Council said any references to safeguarding issues are thoroughly investigated and any deemed action is taken. It said the Council undertook continual reviews of the home-schooling education process for Mr X’s children, and there was no evidence to suggest the home-schooling education was not meeting the children’s needs. The Council acknowledged its previous response to Mr X’s complaint was insufficient however and it apologised for this.

Analysis

14. Schedule 5, paragraph 1 of the Local Government Act 1974 says we cannot investigate complaints relating to the commencement or conduct of civil or criminal proceedings before any court of law.
15. Mr X’s concerns regarding his son’s home-schooled education were considered as part of the family court process. As a result, we cannot investigate this complaint.
16. I acknowledge Mr X also complained about the Council’s handling of his complaint. However, the Council upheld this aspect of the complaint and provided an apology. Further investigation of this matter is unlikely to add to the Council's own complaint investigation or lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Decision

17. I have ended our investigation of Mr X’s complaint because the substantive complaint falls outside our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman