Hertfordshire County Council (19 011 371)

Category : Education > Alternative provision

Decision : Upheld

Decision date : 15 Sep 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Miss X complains the Council failed to provide suitable education to her daughter, Y, causing distress and loss of education. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault. He recommends the Council: provides an apology; pays £7500 for loss of education and SEN provision; pays £500 for distress; pays £100 for time and trouble; pays £100 for loss of opportunity, addresses an outstanding query and takes action to prevent recurrence.

The complaint

  1. Miss X complains the Council failed to provide suitable education to her daughter, Y. She says Y has missed over one year of school and she has had to stay home to look after her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
  2. 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)
  3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
  4. We cannot investigate complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(b), as amended)
  5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))
  6. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.
  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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I spoke to Miss X and I reviewed documents provided by Miss X and the Council. I gave Miss X and the Council the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision and I considered the comments provided.

Back to top

What I found

Education, Health and Care Plan; annual review

  1. An Education, Health and Care Plan (“EHCP”) is a legal document that describes a child’s special educational, health and social care needs. It explains the extra help that will be given to meet those needs.
  2. The SEND Code of Practice, issued by the Department for Education, provides statutory guidance for councils. I have referred to this below.
  3. Councils must review an EHCP at least every 12 months.
  4. Within 2 weeks of the meeting the school must provide a report setting out any recommended amendments to the EHCP to the council.
  5. Within four weeks of the review meeting, the council must decide whether it will keep the EHCP as it is, amend, or cease to maintain the plan. It must notify the child’s parent and the school. If it needs to amend the plan, the council should start the process of amendment without delay.
  6. The council must send the draft EHCP to the child’s parent and give them at least 15 days to give views and make representations on the content.
  7. If a child’s parent asks for a particular school the council must name the school in the EHCP unless:
    • it would be unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or SEN of the child or young person, or
    • the attendance of the child or young person there would be incompatible with the efficient education of others, or the efficient use of resources.
  8. The council must consult the school and consider their comments very carefully before deciding whether to name it in the EHCP.
  9. Where a parent request is not met, the council must specify mainstream provision in the EHCP unless it would be:
    • against the wishes of the parent or young person, or
    • incompatible with the efficient education of others
  10. When the parent suggests changes that the council agrees, it should amend the draft plan and issue the final EHCP as quickly as possible.
  11. Where the council does not agree the suggested changes it may still issue the final EHCP.
  12. In any event the council should issue a final EHCP to the parent and any school named within 8 weeks of issuing the draft plan. It must also notify the child’s parent of their right to appeal to the Tribunal and the time limit for doing so.

Right to Education

  1. Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 says parents must ensure their children receive suitable full time education at school or otherwise. A failure to meet this duty on the parent’s part is an offence under Section 444.
  2. Sections 436 to 447 cover councils’ duties and powers under the Act.
  3. Section 436 of the Act says councils must identify children not receiving an education.
  4. Section 437 allows councils to serve a notice on parents requiring them to satisfy the council that their child is receiving suitable education if it comes to the council’s attention that this might not be case. It also allows councils to issue a School Attendance Order (“SAO”) where parents fail to satisfy them.
  5. Sections 443 and 444 allow councils to prosecute parents who do not comply with an SAO, or who fail to ensure the attendance of their school-registered child.
  6. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says councils must make suitable educational provision for children of compulsory school age who, because of illness, exclusion or otherwise, may not receive suitable education unless such arrangements are made for them. This duty applies to all children, whether or not they are on the roll of a school, and whatever type of school they attend.
  7. The provision can be at a school or otherwise, but it must be suitable for the child’s age, ability and aptitude, including any special needs. The only exception to this is where the physical or mental health of the child is such that full-time education would not be in his/her best interests.
  8. Full time education is usually between 22 and 25 hours per week unless it is clear a child cannot cope with full time education. The law allows councils to view 1:1 provision as worth more than provision delivered in groups.
  9. Where a council maintains an EHCP then, unless a child’s parent has made suitable arrangements, the council must also arrange the special educational provision specified in the EHCP.
  10. The Ombudsman issued a Focus Report in September 2011 amended in June 2016, ‘Out of school….out of mind?’. This gives guidance on how we expect councils to fulfil their responsibilities to provide education for children who, for whatever reason, do not attend school full-time. The report made six recommendations based on examples of good practice seen. It said councils should:
    • consider the individual circumstances of each case and be aware that a council may need to act whatever the reason for absence (with the exception of minor issues that schools deal with on a day-to-day basis) even when a child is on a school roll;
    • consult all the professionals involved in a child's education and welfare, taking account of the evidence in coming to decisions;
    • choose, based on all the evidence, whether to enforce attendance or provide the child with suitable alternative education;
    • keep all cases of part-time education under review with a view to increasing it if a child's capacity to learn increases;
    • adopt a strategic and planned approach to reintegrating children into mainstream education where they are able to do so; and
    • put whatever action is chosen into practice without delay to ensure the child is back in education as soon as possible.

Home-educated children with SEN

  1. Under Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 parents have the right to educate children, including children with SEN, at home.
  2. In cases where councils and parents agree home education is the right provision for a child with an EHCP, the Plan should make clear the child will be educated at home. If it does then the council, under Section 42(2) of the Children and Families Act 2014, must arrange the special educational provision set out in the plan, working with the parents.
  3. In cases where the EHCP gives the name of a school or type of school and the parents decide to educate at home, the council is not under a duty to make the special educational provision set out in the plan if it is satisfied the parents’ arrangements are suitable.

Council’s complaints policy

  1. I note the Council does not publish a copy of its complaints policy on its website. However, the Council says it sends the relevant complaint factsheet alongside any complaint acknowledgement.
  2. The Council has provided me with a copy of the relevant factsheet in this case. This says a manager will investigate and respond within 20 days at stage 1. If a person adds further details to their complaint it may be necessary to provide further stage 1 responses.
  3. If appropriate, a senior manager will review the complaint at stage 2. If a person remains unhappy after stage 2 they can contact the Ombudsman.

What happened

  1. Y was due to start secondary school in September 2017.
  2. Miss X says the Council failed to provide Y with education over the following periods:
    • September 2017 to November 2017
    • March 2018 to April 2019
    • September 2019 up to the date it issued a final EHCP in October 2019
  3. The Council accepts Y was out of school and had no education from September to November 2017 as it had not found a suitable placement and did not arrange alternative provision.
  4. The Council issued a final EHCP naming School A on 14 November 2017. I note School A is a mainstream secondary school. The EHCP says Y has Autism Spectrum Disorder and suffers from anxiety and separation anxiety. Miss X says she wants Y to have 1:1 support and notes she has always been a school refuser. Of relevance to this case the EHCP says:
    • A key person will meet Y in the morning to support her transition from Mum to school.
    • Staff in general will support Y to manage her anxieties.
    • Y will have short timetabled sessions with a mentor to develop emotional literacy and social communication skills.
  5. The EHCP does not say Y will receive 1:1 support at school. I note Miss X could have appealed the content of the EHCP to the SEND Tribunal if she wished.
  6. Y started School A in December 2017. Miss X says School A provided individual support to Y at the start but could not sustain this. When School A withdrew this support Y’s anxiety increased.
  7. On 29 January 2018 Miss X emailed the Council to say School A was not meeting Y’s EHCP provision. Y was struggling as a result causing School A to send her home.
  8. The Council says it failed to save this email and so took no action in response.
  9. An Annual Review meeting took place on 6 March 2018. The Council has provided a copy of the paperwork completed by School A in May 2018. I note the following:
    • Miss X wanted Y to have 1:1 support to reduce her anxiety.
    • School A says it continued to provide a key person to meet Y in the mornings and provided support in line with the EHCP but Y refused to stay in school. Y had not remained at school for longer than one lesson most days.
    • It was agreed an Educational Psychologist (“EP”) would review and reassess Y’s needs. This could be done in May.
    • Y’s needs had significantly changed and she needed 1:1 support.
    • Y’s teachers say they have had very little contact with her. The English teacher mentions Y could access homework set for the class online, but she is unsure if Y does. A support teacher also mentions Y could complete homework using the online system.
    • There is nothing to suggest School A is otherwise providing any work for Y to complete at home, in place of her attending school.
  10. On 14 March Miss X emailed the Council asking for a Sensory Integration Assessment (“SIA”). She also expressed concern Y was still out of school.
  11. On 18 April Miss X told the Council Y was not attending School A at all due to her anxiety.
  12. Miss X says there was an Annual Review meeting in March, April and June 2018 before the Council sent her its response dated 15 June.
  13. I note the Council has provided an EP report, dated 1 June, which is referred to in Annual Review paperwork following a 5 June 2018 Annual Review meeting. It therefore appears there was no progress following the March 2018 Annual Review until an EP assessment had taken place.
  14. Miss X asked the Council to consult with School B.
  15. The Council issued a draft amended EHCP on 3 July 2018.
  16. On 11 July the Council told Miss X it considered School B was not suitable to meet Y’s needs. However, I note the Council did not consult with School B, contrary to the decision making process set out in the statutory guidance.
  17. The Council issued a final EHCP on 6 September 2018 naming School A. Of relevance, the EHCP says:
    • School A will work with Miss X and Y to re-engage Y.
    • School A will provide 1:1 support full time at first which will decrease once Y feels more settled and confident.
    • Staff in general will support Y to manage her anxieties.
    • Y will have short timetabled sessions with a mentor to develop emotional literacy and social communication skills.
  18. Miss X was unhappy the Council named School A. However, I note Miss X had the right to appeal to the SEND Tribunal about the school named if she wished.
  19. The Council held a meeting with Miss X and other professionals in October 2018 to discuss a way forward as Y remained out of school. The Council says an Educational Psychologist gave School A strategies to try.
  20. On 16 October Miss X wrote to the Council confirming Y was not attending School A due to extreme anxiety and had now missed six months of school. She asked the Council for an SIA again, noting she had not received a response to her request in March 2018. She said the Council had a duty to provide education to Y under s19 of the Education Act and she thought Y needed education other than at school.
  21. The Council spoke to Miss X on 2 November. Miss X said she wanted two hours’ home tuition per week in Maths and English as that was all Y could manage. The Council said it would need medical evidence to prove Y was medically unfit to attend school. School A could then refer Y for Education Support due to Medical Absence (“ESMA”).
  22. The Council’s records show Miss X provided some evidence in November; School A referred to ESMA and; ESMA were due to discuss Y’s case on 13 December.
  23. On 12 December the Council decided Y’s needs could be met in school. It decided to consult with School B and School C. However, both schools said they could not meet Y’s needs.
  24. On 25 January Miss X asked for an emergency annual review. I note Y remained out of school.
  25. The Council held an Annual Review meeting on 1 February 2019. ESMA told Miss X her evidence from CAHMS only supported her request for education other than at school and did not say Y was too unwell to attend school. Therefore, it could not provide support. ESMA told School A it remained responsible for Y’s learning while she remained on roll and suggested ways it could provide access to learning. School A agreed to investigate independent study materials to send home.
  26. The Council’s records show it was considering a new provision at School C for Y, with home tuition in the meantime to help Y transition.
  27. School A signed the Annual Review report on 21 February 2019. The Council does not have a record of when it received this from the school.
  28. On 26 March the Council told Miss X it would amend the EHCP. It also discussed home tuition with her.
  29. School A took Y off roll in April 2019. The Council took steps to arrange 5 hours’ home tuition per week until Y could start at the new provision in School C.
  30. Home tuition started on 9 May but despite repeated efforts Y did not engage with the tutor.
  31. The Council issued a draft EHCP on 21 May 2019.
  32. The Council held a meeting on 20 June as Y had not engaged with the tutor. It then arranged online learning for Y instead.
  33. Tuition stopped from 24 June as Y had not engaged.
  34. On 3 July Miss X told the Council Y refused to engage in the online learning as it involved a live webcam and asked for an alternative.
  35. On 24 July the Council consulted with two other online learning providers
  36. On 15 August the Council issued a further draft EHCP.
  37. Miss X has evidenced she chased up a final EHCP on 3 September 2019.
  38. On 1 October Y started online learning.
  39. On 2 October 2019 the Council issued a final EHCP naming alternative provision. I note the EHCP details resources and strategies to engage Y in learning should Y attend school. It does not set out any specific therapies or provision such as Occupational Therapy or Speech and Language Therapy.
  40. Miss X appealed to the Tribunal about the content of the final EHCP. The Tribunal issued an Order on 23 July 2020 for the Council to amend the EHCP in line with a working document. Of relevance to this case:
    • Y was to be educated other than in school.
    • Y would receive a total 6 hours’ per week online learning.
    • Y was unable to see professionals or attend school at this time but an Occupational Therapist (“OT”) would train Miss X to deliver a “sensory diet” to Y at home.
    • The Council would review and amend the EHCP as necessary in future, as Y’s needs and ability to engage with professionals and access school changed.
  41. The Council issued a final EHCP on 24 August 2020. In addition to the above, this also provided for a Speech and Language Therapist (“SALT) to set up a programme for Miss X to deliver.

Complaint correspondence

  1. On 5 March 2019 Miss X complained to the Council. In summary she said:
    • In January 2018 she had told the Council School A was not following the EHCP.
    • The Council failed to consult with School B.
    • Y’s anxiety is so extreme she cannot access school.
    • The Council has a duty under s19 of the Education Act to provide education.
    • The work recently sent home by School A is not suitable for Y.
  2. The Council responded on 8 April. In summary:
    • It apologised for failing to save Miss X’s email of January 2018. It explained the relevant staff member did not follow the correct protocol but has now left the Council.
    • It accepts it did not consult with School B. However, it thought School B was unsuitable for Y’s SEN as explained in a letter to Miss X in July 2018. It later did consult with School B which confirmed it was not suitable.
    • At the March 2018 Annual Review School A was concerned it could not meet Y’s needs as she refused to attend. It offered support to School A but as Y did not attend this closed. An Education Psychologist gave School A strategies to try in October. It also asked Miss X to provide evidence Y was medically unfit to attend school. The evidence provided in January 2019 was not sufficient. In February 2019 it gave School A further advice on how Y could access education.
    • Y remains on roll at School A which had tried to engage her and has sent work home. School A remains responsible for Y’s education.
    • Based on the updated information available it considers Y’s needs would meet guidance for a new provision for girls with high anxiety who are school refusers. Before this becomes available, in September 2019, it will offer to provide a home tutor to support Y as part of the transition process back into a school setting.
  3. I note the Council did not comment on Miss X’s complaint School A had not followed the EHCP or that the work sent home by School A was unsuitable.
  4. Miss X complained further on 28 April. In summary she said:
    • The Council had not addressed her complaint properly.
    • The Council had not met its s19 duty to provide education while Y is not in school.
    • The Council did not follow the EHCP process properly.
    • She remains unhappy with the content of Y’s EHCP.
    • The Council ignored her request for an SIA.
    • Y has missed year 7 and year 8.
  5. The Council provided a further response on 23 May. It said educational provision was available to Y at School A however she refused to attend. It had arranged interim provision until Y could start at School C.
  6. I note the Council still did not address Miss X’s complaints School A had not followed the EHCP or that the work sent home by School A was unsuitable. It also did not address the further complaints that it failed to follow the EHCP process and ignored Miss X’s request for an SIA.
  7. On 24 May Miss X told the Council it had failed to address all the points she raised.
  8. On 24 June a senior manager at the Council told Miss X they had reviewed the previous correspondence, were satisfied all points had been addressed and had nothing further to add. (I note this appears to be a stage 2 response).
  9. On 26 June Miss X repeated the Council had not addressed all issues. She then continued to chase the Council for a further response.
  10. On 9 August the Council said it had already investigated the issues raised and it would continue to work with her on Y’s provision.
  11. Miss X asked to go to stage 2. She said the Council had failed to provide any education to Y for over a year and had still not addressed the points she raised. The Council did not ensure School A provided work for Y or arrange alternative provision.
  12. The Council provide its final response on 30 September 2019. In summary:
    • It accepted Y had no education provision September to November 2017 while it looked for a placement. It apologised, said it would ensure it put alternative support in place in future and offered £300.
    • Y remained on roll at School A until April 2019. School A remained responsible for Y’s education until then. School A tried to engage Y in learning and sent work home. The Council has also since checked provision. The Head teacher at School A says the provision in Y’s EHCP was in place. Y now accesses 5 hours’ online learning per week.
    • The Council told Miss X to contact the Ombudsman if she remained unhappy.
  13. In October 2019 the Council issued a final EHCP which Miss X appealed.
  14. In comments on my draft decision, the Council explained it had not provided Miss X with a complaint factsheet but that its complaint acknowledgement letter provided details of its complaints process. However, it accepts that at the time of Miss X’s complaint, it could have been more clear with its procedures and escalation policies.

Findings

  1. Miss X did not contact the Ombudsman within 12 months of her first having cause to complain about the Council’s actions. However, I consider the alleged faults dating from September 2017 are all closely related and any injustice has been ongoing. In the circumstances of this case I consider it appropriate to exercise discretion to investigate the alleged faults from September 2017.

Education and SEN provision

  1. The Council accepts fault in not providing education and SEN provision to Y from September 2017 to November 2017. I note the Council offered £300 by way of a remedy. However, taking account Y that was due to start secondary school which is an important time, noting her SEN and noting she received no provision at all, I consider a payment of £1000 is appropriate; approximately £500 per month of lost educational provision.
  2. The Council considered School A available and accessible to Y. Therefore, when it knew Y was not attending it could have taken action to ensure Miss X took Y to school. However, I have not seen any evidence this happened.
  3. From March 2018 to September 2018 I consider the Council knew Y was out of school and, either knew or should have known she was not receiving any education or SEN provision. The Council took no action, either to ensure Miss X sent Y to School A or to ensure Y otherwise received suitable education and SEN provision. This is fault. Y missed a further four months’ (term time only) education and SEN provision as a result. I will recommend a payment of £500 per month in recognition of this.
  4. In September 2018 the Council issued a final EHCP and expected School A to re-engage Y. However, by October it was clear Y was still out of school and not receiving any education or SEN provision. I note the Council asked for evidence to show whether Y was medically unfit to attend. However, once Miss X provided this the Council did not communicate its decision or take any action to ensure Y received education until February 2019. This amounts to fault. Y missed a further four months’ (term time) education and SEN provision (October to February) as a result. I will recommend a payment of £500 per month in recognition of this loss.
  5. In February 2019 the Council gave School A further advice on providing work at home for Y. However, I have not seen any evidence the Council ensured School A was then sending work home or that Y was accessing this work. I consider the Council knew or should have known Y was still not receiving suitable full time education or SEN provision. However, it did not take action to address this. This amounts to fault. Y missed a further 2 months’ education and SEN provision as a result. I will recommend a payment of £500 per month in recognition of this loss.
  6. Once School A took Y off roll, in April 2019, the Council arranged tuition and then when Y did not engage, online learning. While I recognise Y did not engage with the tuition or online learning I consider the Council was making attempts to provide education to Y and her refusal to engage was not through the Council’s fault. However, the Council also intended to provide one hour SEN provision to Y per week alongside tuition. I have not seen evidence it did so. This is fault. Y had no SEN provision from April to October 2019. I consider a further payment of £500 for missed SEN provision is appropriate, taking into account almost 5 months’ term time was missed and the type of provision specified in the EHCP.
  7. In addition to Y’s loss of provision, I note Miss X was unable to take up any study or employment opportunities while she had to remain home with Y. Both her and Y also suffered distress and uncertainty about Y’s education. I will recommend a remedy for this further injustice arising from the Council’s fault.
  8. The Council issued a final EHCP in October 2019. I note Miss X has appealed this. I have not considered matters beyond October 2019 as it is reasonable to allow the Council the opportunity to investigate and respond to further issues. And because it is not within my jurisdiction to consider any matters Miss X has appealed to Tribunal.

EHCP process

  1. The Council is at fault for not responding to Miss X’s email of 29 January 2018. This was a missed opportunity to take action and caused Miss X distress.
  2. On the information provided it appears the Council could not progress the March 2018 review until it had input from an EP. However, it remains the Council’s responsibility to meet the statutory timescales and it should have ensured it had the relevant information and input available at the March 2018 Annual Review meeting. I therefore find the Council at fault for delay. Y did not miss out any provision due to delay and I note Miss X did not appeal the final EHCP issued in September 2018. However, the delay would have caused Miss X further distress and uncertainty.
  3. The Council did not consult with School B as it should have done. This is fault, causing Miss X distress and uncertainty. As School B later confirmed it could not take Y I find this did not cause further significant injustice. But others could suffer injustice if the Council does not take action to prevent recurrence.
  4. Following the February 2019 annual review, there was a slight delay in the Council informing Miss X whether it would amend the EHCP, even taking into account delay by School A. There was also a significant delay from the issue of a draft EHCP in May 2019 to the issue of a final EHCP in October 2019. The Council says this delay was so it could work with Miss X to identify a provision she would be happy with and Y would attend. However, it has provided no evidence to support this and I note Miss X was chasing the final EHCP. I therefore find the Council’s delay amounts to fault. This delayed Miss X’s right to appeal causing further distress.
  5. The Tribunal has since decided Miss X’s appeal. The Council now has to provide six hours’ weekly online learning to Y and train Miss X to provide OT and SALT to Y. Taking into account the Council’s efforts to provide tuition and online learning from April 2019 to October 2019 I do not consider the delay in appeal prevented Y accessing online learning. However, the delay did mean Y missed out on OT and SALT support. I therefore consider the Council should make a further payment of £1000 in recognition of the OT and SALT support missed due to its delay in issuing the final EHCP.

Complaints process

  1. Having reviewed the correspondence exchanged and the Council’s complaints process, I consider the Council should have signposted Miss X to the Ombudsman within its June 2019 stage 2 response. However, it did not inform her she could complain to the Ombudsman until September 2019, after further correspondence. As I have not seen any evidence the Council otherwise made it clear to Miss X when she could approach the Ombudsman, I find this amounts to fault. Miss X spent longer in the complaints process than necessary, putting her to time and trouble.
  2. Further, the Council did not address all of Miss X’s complaints during the complaints process, as detailed in the “what happened” section above. This amounts to fault. This also caused Miss X to spend longer in the complaints process than necessary, putting her to time and trouble.
  3. The Council did not address Miss X’s request for an SIA. This is also fault, causing Miss X further distress and uncertainty.

Agreed action

  1. To remedy the injustice set out above I recommend the Council carry out the following actions:
  2. Within one month of the date of my decision:
    • Provide Miss X with a written apology for the identified failings;
    • Pay Miss X £7500 in recognition of Y’s loss of education and SEN provision.
    • Pay Miss X £500 in recognition of the distress and uncertainty suffered by her and Y.
    • Pay Miss X £100 for time and trouble.
    • Pay Miss X £100 for missed opportunity for support in January 2018.
    • Write to Miss X, addressing her request for a Sensory Integration Assessment, if it has not already done so.
  3. Within three months of the date of my decision:
    • Take steps to ensure staff are aware of their legal duties to ensure children are in school or otherwise receiving suitable education.
    • Take steps to ensure staff are aware of the need to consult with schools in line with the SEN Code of Practice.
  4. The Council has accepted my recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I find the Council at fault because it did not ensure Y was in school or otherwise receiving suitable education. The Council has accepted my recommendations and I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings