Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of Mrs X’s child’s school, or how the Council responded to a complaint about that matter. We cannot investigate what happens in schools and of the matters we could investigate, there are no wider public interest issues to justify investigating, for the reasons I have set out.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to act on safeguarding and other concerns relating to Y’s Education, Health, and Care (EHC) Plan. Mrs X said the Council was at fault because it failed to:
1. Accurately record meeting notes or provide notes from earlier meetings.
2. investigate the safeguarding concerns;
3. ensure Y’s provision in their EHC plan was in place, and;
4. investigate a misuse of funds in relation to provision at Y’s school.
2. Mrs X said this has caused a significant impact on her and she now feels unsafe attending the Council’s meetings.

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 cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. 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 injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant.
8. I considered the information provided in the Council’s complaint responses.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Complaint a)

10. Mrs X was unhappy saying the Council did not properly record a meeting it held in July 2025. She highlighted several inaccuracies and said the Council had failed to record key information. She also said the Council had not provided notes of earlier meetings from 18 months beforehand.
11. Given the expectation in law, that I have highlighted at paragraph five, I have only considered the Council’s actions since November 2024, which is 12 months before the point Mrs X complained to us. There are no good reasons why Mrs X could not have approached us sooner if she was concerned about matters from earlier in 2024.
12. The Council’s complaint response acknowledged it had not always been able to secure notes from earlier meetings, but to resolve her concerns, it had agreed it would look at a transcription remedy and identified a member of staff who would chair meetings in future.
13. I will not investigate either aspect of this part of the complaint. Mrs X can complain to the Information Commissioners Office about data rectification, if she believes the Council’s records are still inaccurate. And from November 2024, the Council provided notes of meetings. Notwithstanding Mrs X does not believe the latter records are an accurate record, the Council has agreed how it will respond to this complaint in the future. Therefore, any further investigation by us on this point would not change the outcome for Mrs X.

Complaint b)

14. Mrs X was concerned the Council had failed to investigate an incident involving Y, which had occurred at school. Noting at paragraph four, we cannot investigate what happens in schools, we can consider the actions of the Council’s Local Authority Designated Officr (LADO). In this respect the evidence shows the school referred the incident to the LADO and the LADO decided it did not meet the threshold for a LADO investigation. It is unlikely we would find fault in this decision and so I will not investigate this matter.

Complaint c)

Mrs X raised a complaint about the Council’s failure to ensure the full provision in Section F of Y’s EHC was being met. Mrs X has made a separate complaint about this, and I will not consider it here.

Complaint d)

15. Finally, Mrs X said the school was responsible for a misuse of the funding, which the Council provided to it, for Y’s support. She wants the Council to investigate this. As earlier indicated, I cannot investigate how the school delivers its day-to-day teaching provision, because the law does not allow it.
16. Nor will I investigate the Council’s actions after this concern was raised to it. Mrs X has not been caused any significant injustice because of anything the Council did or did not do in this matter.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the law does not allow us to investigate some of it and there are otherwise no wider public interest issues to justify investigating the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman