• The complaint
• What I have and have not investigated
• The Ombudsman’s role and powers
• How I considered this complaint
• What I found
• Agreed action
• Final decision

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: The complainant (Mrs X) said the Council failed to: provide suitable education to her son (Y), deliver all special educational provision for him and consider her Personal Budget request. Mrs X also complained about the Council’s failings when carrying out a key stage transfer for Y. We found the Council at fault within all issues of Mrs X’s complaint. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X and Y, make payments to recognise Y’s lost education and continue making payments until Y starts accessing suitable education. The Council also agreed to provide its staff with training on Personal Budgets.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s failing:

• to provide a full-time education for Y since October 2018;
• to provide any education for Y since November 2021;
• to set up alternative provision;
• to set up a Personal Budget;
• to consult with secondary schools and follow up consultations in a timely manner.

2. Mrs X says the Council’s failings caused her and Y injustice:
   • At the critical years of his life Y missed education and opportunities to develop. His difficulties were increased by the Council’s failings;
   • Mrs X experienced depression and anxiety which impacted her work. She also had financial strain of hiring advocates and funding private therapists.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

3. I have not investigated anything which happened before issuing an EHCP for Y in December 2020. Normally we would not investigate matters which happened more than 12 months from when the complaint was made to us. If Mrs X was unhappy about Y’s education between October 2018 and December 2020 she could have complained sooner.
4. There are good reasons, however, to extend my investigation back to December 2020:
   • During the EHC needs assessment of Y’s special educational needs (SEN) and drafting of his plan the Council became fully aware of his difficulties with accessing school education;
   • From the date of issuing Y’s final EHCP the Council became responsible for delivery of special educational provisions (SEP) identified in Y’s EHCP;
   • Mrs X told us for a long time she was unaware of the Council’s responsibilities for children with SEN, which caused delay in her applying for an EHC needs assessment for Y. Only once Y got his EHCP and after she received help from privately funded advocates, she gradually started exercising her rights by complaining and appealing.
5. I have not investigated whether the Council failed by naming a mainstream school in Y’s amended EHCP in February 2022 as this has been appealed by Mrs X.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

6. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this report, we 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. We 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)
7. SENDIST is a tribunal that considers special educational needs. We cannot investigate a complaint when someone has appealed to a tribunal. However, we may investigate whether there may have been a delay in the process which led to the tribunal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
8. We cannot investigate complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(b), as amended)
9. 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/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
10. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

11. I talked to Mrs X and considered all the documents and information provided by her and the Council.
12. I reviewed:
    • Our Focus Report ‘Out of school… out of mind? How councils can do more to give children out of school a good education’, published in 2016 (Focus Report 1);
    • Our Focus Report ‘Out of school… out of sight? Ensuring children out of school get a good education’, published in July 2022 (Focus Report 2).
    • The Council’s Personal Budget policy;
    • The Council’s ‘Children’s direct payments detailed guidance’.
13. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
14. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this report with the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

Full-time education and alternative provision

15. The DfE non-statutory guidance states all pupils of compulsory school age are entitled to a full-time education. In very exceptional circumstances there may be a need for a temporary part-time timetable to meet a pupil’s individual needs. For example where a medical condition prevents a pupil from attending full-time education and a part-time timetable is considered as part of a re-integration package. A part-time timetable must not be treated as a long-term solution.  (DfE School Attendance: guidance for schools, August 2020)
16. Councils must arrange suitable education at school or elsewhere for pupils who are out of school because of exclusion, illness or for other reasons, if they would not receive suitable education without such arrangements. [The provision generally should be full-time unless it is not in the child’s interests.] (Education Act 1996, section 19). We refer to this as section 19 or alternative education provision. Once a council has identified a child needs alternative education, it must arrange this as quickly as possible.
17. This applies to all children of compulsory school age living in the local council area, whether or not they are on the roll of a school. (Statutory guidance ‘Alternative Provision’ January 2013)
18. The courts have considered the circumstances where the section 19 duty applies. Caselaw has established that a council will have a duty to provide alternative education under section 19 if there is no suitable education available to the child which is “reasonably practicable” for the child to access. The “acid test” is whether educational provision the council has offered is “available and accessible to the child”. (R (on the application of DS) v Wolverhampton City Council 2017)
19. Suitable education means efficient education suitable to a child’s age, ability and aptitude and to any special educational needs he may have. (Education Act 1996, section 19(6))

Delivery of Special Educational Provision (SEP)

20. The council has a duty to secure special educational provision specified in an EHC plan for the child or young person. (Children and Families Act S.42)
21. The Courts have said this duty to arrange provision is owed personally to the child and is non-delegable. This means if a council asks another organisation to make the provision and that organisation fails to do so, the council remains responsible. (R v London Borough of Harrow ex parte M [1997] ELR 62), R v North Tyneside Borough Council [2010] EWCA Civ 135)
22. The Ombudsman does recognise it is not practical for councils to keep a ‘watching brief’ on whether schools are providing all the special educational provision for every pupil with an EHC plan. The Ombudsman does consider that councils should be able to demonstrate due diligence in discharging this important legal duty and as a minimum have systems in place to:
    • check the special educational provision is in place when a new or substantially different EHC plan is issued or there is a change in placement;
    • check the provision at least annually via the review process; and
    • investigate complaints or concerns that provision is not in place at any time.

Personal Budget

23. A personal budget is money identified by a council to deliver provision set out in an EHC plan where the parent or young person is involved in securing the provision.
24. Councils must provide parents and young children with information on:
    • The provision for which a personal budget may be available;
    • Details of organisations that provide advice and assistance on personal budgets;
    • The conditions which must be met before direct payments may be made;

(Special Educational Needs (Personal Budgets) Regulations 2014 regulation 3)

25. A council must consider a request for a direct payment if a child’s parent made it at any time during the period in which the draft EHCP is being prepared or reviewed. (Special Educational Needs (Personal Budgets) Regulations 2014 regulation 4)
26. Councils may only make direct payments for special educational provision specified in an EHCP and not for funding a place at a school or post-16 institution. (Special Educational Needs (Personal Budgets) Regulations 2014 regulation 6(2))
27. Where a council refuses to make direct payment it must:
    • Inform the child’s parents in writing of its decision, providing the reasons and informing of the right to request a review;
    • Carry out a review of its decision, if requested to do so, considering any representations made by the child’s parent;
    • Inform the child’s parent in writing of the outcome of the review, giving reasons.

(Special Educational Needs (Personal Budgets) Regulations 2014 regulation 7)

Key stage transfer

28. An EHCP must be reviewed and amended in sufficient time prior to a child moving between key phases of education, to allow for planning for and, where necessary, commissioning of support and provision at the new institution. The review and any amendments must be completed by 15 February in the calendar year of the transfer. (Statutory Guidance ‘Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0-25 years’, 2015 paragraph 9.179)

Human Rights Act 1998 and Equality Act 2010

29. The right to education is provided by Article 2 of the First Protocol in Schedule 1 of the Human Rights Act 1998.
30. The Ombudsman’s remit does not extend to making decisions on whether or not a body in jurisdiction has breached the Human Rights Act – this can only be done by the courts. But the Ombudsman can make decisions about whether or not a body in jurisdiction has had due regard to an individual’s human rights in their treatment of them, as part of our consideration of a complaint.
31. Section 20 of the Equality Act places a duty to make reasonable adjustments for those with disabilities on councils and schools.
32. Section 149 of the Equality Act sets out the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED). This says a public authority (such as a council) must in the exercise of its functions have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination and advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.

What happened

Background

33. After a key stage transfer move to a junior school in the autumn 2018, Y’s difficulties with attending the school increased. He struggled with accessing education at school, despite a part-time timetable.
34. Through a managed move in March 2019 Y started a different mainstream school (School 1). His difficulties continued and he was at risk of a permanent exclusion.
35. In January 2020 Y received a diagnosis of the Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
36. After the national lockdown in March 2020 Y returned to attending School 1 two hours per week. School 1 told the Council it could not meet his needs full time.
37. In October 2020 Y started accessing play therapy funded by Mrs X.

Y’s education and SEP from December 2020 – October 2021

38. The Council issued a final EHCP for Y in the beginning of December 2020.
39. At the end of January 2021 the Council discussed Y’s education with School 1’s Special Educational Needs Coordinator (SENCo). SENCo explained Y was not attending the school but accessed play therapy. School 1 sent a referral to the Positive behaviour, Autism, Learning disability and Mental health Service (PALMS).
40. In the beginning of March Y was attending school twice a week for an hour but there was a plan to increase his attendance first to cover the mornings and gradually to a full-time timetable. Mrs X said to the Council she considered Y might need a specialist setting as despite School 1’s efforts to support Y he had struggled to engage with the education.
41. At the end of May School 1 told the Council Y had still a very reduced timetable, attending twice a week for two hours. School 1 was planning to increase it after half-term but reported Y had significant difficulties with learning and was below age related expectations in all areas. He continued accessing play therapy.
42. In mid-June Mrs X again mentioned a specialist placement for Y in the future and was asking about Occupational Therapy (OT) support.
43. At the end of June Mrs X asked the Council to supplement Y’s part-time timetable with other educational opportunities such as forest school, online learning, tutoring and therapies. She said the parents had been funding play therapy for Y for some time. She asked for Y’s needs to be re-assessed.
44. Responding to Mrs X the Council said providing education was School 1’s responsibility.
45. In July Mrs X asked for an emergency review of Y’s EHCP.
46. From September Y was supported at school by 1:1 Learning Support Assistant (LSA), which, Mrs X says, further undermined his confidence as he felt different from the rest of his peers. Y’s time at school was further reduced to 20 minutes per week – twice per ten minutes.
47. At the end of September an Annual Review meeting took place:
    • The attendees agreed mainstream schools could not meet Y’s SEN;
    • Mrs X said she visited two special schools (School 3 and School 4) which could be considered for Y’s secondary placement; the one which was out of county and further away was her preference (School 3);
    • Y’s difficulties with accessing school environment and his behaviours which put him at risk of a permanent exclusion were discussed.
48. Mrs X was supported by an advocate. The Council’s SEN case officer did not attend the meeting and it was rescheduled for mid-November.
49. Between both meetings School 1 got an Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) Outreach Service report, identifying support strategies for Y. An Art Therapist, who had been delivering play therapy to Y, also provided a report.
50. Discussions which took place at the re-scheduled meeting included:
    • Y’s difficulties with attending School 1 resulting in exclusions;
    • Alternative provisions including nurturing educational opportunities, specialist tutoring for young people with demand avoidance, forest school and equine therapy;
    • Bespoke package of support for opportunities and activities;
    • Bespoke transition back to education;
    • Speech and Language therapy and OT assessments commissioned by the parents to avoid further delays;
51. The Council told Mrs X it intended to amend Y’s EHCP following the Annual Review and would send the proposed amendments in the following week.

Y’s education and SEP from November 2021 – July 2022

52. In November Y stopped attending School 1.
53. At the end of January 2022, when telling Mrs X of the Council’s intent to amend Y’s EHCP, Y’s SEN case officer apologised to Mrs X for not providing tuition package earlier. The case officer told Mrs X:
    • It made a referral for a specialist tutoring for Y;
    • The Council was considering a block of sessions with a therapeutic provider (Provider 1) and an equine therapy for Y.
54. A few days later Mrs X asked the Council if for the rest of Year 6 Y could attend the local special school with an ASD Outreach Service which prepared a report for Y in the autumn 2021. The Council said it would not be possible as there is a long waiting list for this school. It confirmed its Panel would identify the right setting for Y.
55. At the end of February Mrs X requested a Personal Budget to fund private tutoring (Provider 2) which she thought suitable for Y as Provider 1 considered by the Council did not get in touch with her.
56. In March Mrs X asked again for the Council to set up a Personal Budget for Y’s education, therapy and socialisation. The Council failed to respond to this request.
57. The Council offered two hours per day of tutoring for Y from the beginning of May 2022. After three days the tutors said they could not meet Y’s SEN.
58. Although in the beginning of June Y’s new SEN case officer suggested a reintegration programme which Mrs X agreed to, no action followed.
59. Because of unsuccessful consultations with special schools for children with learning difficulties, in August Mrs X asked for alternative education or Education Otherwise than in School (EOTAS).

Key stage transfer

60. At the end of November 2021 Mrs X asked the Council to consult with School 3 for a secondary placement for Y.
61. After communication from Mrs X about the result of secondary school consultations the Council told her School 3 failed to respond but being an independent school the Council had limited powers towards this placement. School 4 stated they supported children with Social Emotional and Mental Health difficulties as the main area of SEN, so would not be suitable for Y. A few days later School 3 said they could not meet Y’s SEN.
62. Following unsuccessful consultations with special provisions of parental preference, the Council told Mrs X it would name a maintained mainstream school (School 2) in Y’s EHCP while looking for a suitable specialist provision.
63. The Council issued an amended EHCP for Y in mid-February, naming School 2 as Y’s secondary placement.
64. In the second week of March Mrs X asked the Council to consult with other schools. She also told the Council School 2 could not meet Y’s SEN.
65. At the end of March the Council identified a special school for pupils with learning difficulties as a suitable provision for Y.
66. From March to the end of July 2022 Mrs X contacted the Council many times asking for further school consultations and school responses. In the beginning of July the Council discussed Y’s secondary placement with Mrs X as well as an option of online tutoring. It confirmed School 2 remained available for Y.
67. In mid-July the Council provided Mrs X with all school consultation responses.
68. In the beginning of April Mrs X requested mediation, which was arranged for the beginning of May. It was re-scheduled at Mrs X’s request twice, following which in the beginning of September Mrs X appealed Y’s EHCP issued in February 2022.

Complaint process

69. In May 2022 Mrs X complained about the lack of full-time education for Y.
70. Not satisfied with the Council’s stage one response, in the beginning of August Mrs X asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage two.
71. In its stage two response the Council said:
    • Until issuing the final EHCP Y’s schools should have undertaken their best endeavours to support him;
    • Y was on roll at school although attended part-time; aware of the increased difficulties with attending School 1 the Council carried out school consultations to find a suitable placement;
    • Y should have been attending School 1 as the Council was not aware of any medical reasons which would justify his non-attendance;
    • Y’s SEP were limited as the Council could not arrange alternative education; the Council is currently considering EOTAS;
    • Despite finding Y needs a specialist provision, the Council made no progress with securing a place for Y in any of the special schools. Meanwhile the Council is consulting with professionals to identify the EOTAS package.
72. In its response to my enquiries the Council listed several elements which, it said, contributed to Y not accessing education:
    • ASD Outreach service conducted Y’s assessment in October and set up supporting strategies. As Mrs X withdrew Y from school in November, there was not enough time to use these strategies;
    • Y could not access tuition arranged by the Council. In its response to the stage two complaint the Council recognised it failed to try to arrange an alternative education after that;
    • Y’s non-attendance was not followed up due to an administrative error.
73. The Council has recognised the impact of the failures on Y and Mrs X and offered a payment of £400 a month from November 2021 till July 2022 when Y was not attending the school, less two months of school holidays - £2400 in total to be used for an enrichment activity of Y’s choosing or further tuition. The Council also offered a written apology and £250 recognising distress caused by its faults.

Analysis

Full-time education and alternative provision

74. I found the Council failed to:
    • provide Y with full-time education or suitable education, if full-time education was not in Y’s interest, from December 2020 to October 2021;
    • provide Y with alternative education from November 2021 to July 2022;
    • consider and record the extent of Y’s ability to engage with education both at school and otherwise to ensure Y received education suitable for his age, ability and aptitude.
75. In our Focus Report 1, exploring councils’ responsibilities to provide education for children who, for whatever reason, do not attend school full-time we recommended councils should:
    • consider the individual circumstances of each case and be aware that a council may need to act whatever the reason for absence (except for 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;
    • decide, based on all the evidence, whether to require attendance at school 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.
76. The Council failed to comply with our recommendations especially mentioned under bullet points a, c and f.
77. In its response to my enquiries the Council said it was aware of Y being on a reduced timetable from the beginning of December 2020 till November 2021, with the input from SEND support service team and Educational Psychology service. The Council knew about Y accessing play therapy and him not responding to strategies put in place at School 1 to support him. The Council said, however, it fulfilled its duty under S.19 of the Education Act 1996 as it had professional advice it would not be in Y’s best interest to be provided with full-time education.
78. The law says councils have a duty to arrange suitable education for pupils who cannot attend schools. Any arrangements for part-time school education, as explained under paragraph 15 should be short-term or should be supplemented by alternative arrangements.
79. The available evidence, in particular reports and meeting notes from the Annual Review in the autumn 2021, show Y has made hardly any progress since he started his school education and academically he was still at the level of Reception or Year 1. Considering his very reduced attendance at school and his lack of academic progress it cannot be argued Y was provided with suitable education. Play therapy, arranged and funded by Mrs X, might have supported Y’s general development and should have contributed to meeting his SEN but it was not contributing to Y’s accessing curriculum.
80. After Y stopped attending School 1 in November 2021 the Council tried to arrange tuition for Y for ten hours a week. This action was very delayed as the tutoring only started in the beginning of May 2022 and after three days Y’s tutors ended educating Y as they could not meet his SEN. It cannot, therefore, be considered as suitable alternative education.
81. Some correspondence from the Council, including its response to my enquiries, suggests the Council’s view was Mrs X withheld Y from attending School 1 from November 2021 without providing any medical reasons for his inability to attend and the Council failed by not acting in line with legislation enforcing school attendance. The evidence, however, does not support this assertion for the following reasons:
    • In October 2021 Y was attending school twice a week for ten minutes, to get some social interaction rather than education, which shows the extent of Y’s difficulties in accessing mainstream school environment;
    • At the Annual Review meeting in September 2021 the attendees agreed School 1 could not meet his SEN and he needed a specialist placement. His difficulties with accessing education were discussed at length;
    • In January 2022 Y’s SEN case officer apologised for not contacting Mrs X sooner about arranging Y’s tutoring, which suggests the Council has accepted the need to make alternative educational arrangements for Y;
    • The history of Y’s education shows Mrs X tried to engage with School 1 and the Council to increase Y’s school attendance.
82. Prolonged lack of suitable education for Y, despite the Council’s knowledge of his limited attendance at school and difficulties in accessing school environment, shows the Council’s failure to have due regard to Y’s human rights and its Public Sector Equality Duty to eliminate discrimination and advance equality of opportunity.

Delivery of SEP

83. I recognise several services were involved in supporting Y, in particular:
    • School autism support service
    • Behaviour support service
    • In the autumn 2021 – special school Autism Outreach service
    • Educational Psychology service
84. Professionals from these services provided advice and strategies aimed at supporting Y’s attendance at school and re-engagement with education. Delivery of specific strategies depended, however, on his attendance at school or provision of alternative education, which until October 2021 was very limited and from November 2021 stopped.
85. The Council failed to provide all SEP included in Y’s plan and this failure was consequential to the reduced or no education provided to Y.

Personal Budget

86. Mrs X asked for a Personal Budget to support Y in February 2022, March 2022 and August 2022. In its response to my enquiries the Council said Mrs X failed to provide any details of her request apart from mentioning the budget was to fund Y’s tutoring, therapy and socialisation. In August Mrs X asked for an EOTAS package.
87. The Council failed to consider Mrs X’s repeated requests for a Personal Budget which is fault. It is unreasonable to expect the parent to provide all needed information without any advice from the Council on the requirements. The Council should have engaged with Mrs X in discussing this option. If it had refused Mrs X’s request, Mrs X could have asked for a review of the Council’s decision.
88. The Council’s fault caused Mrs X injustice by not allowing her to make arrangements for specialist tutoring which would ensure Y gets some education as well as therapy and socialisation. Mrs X was left frustrated at the delay in securing support needed for Y.

Key stage transfer

89. Although the Council issued Y’s amended EHCP on 16 February 2022, with only one day delay in relation to the statutory timescales, the evidence suggests many school consultations which should have happened before mid-February only took place afterwards.
90. As explained under paragraph 28 of this decision the purpose of a timely review and amendment of EHCP, including a new school placement, is to allow time for planning and, if necessary, commissioning support and provision at the new institution. This did not happen for Y. If the Council, despite Mrs X’s view and School 1’s long term difficulties in engaging Y with education, considered School 2 a realistic choice for Y’s secondary education, it should have started arranging transition and preparing staff and provision in School 2 to meet Y’s SEN. We have no evidence this took place.
91. Before issuing an amended EHCP for Y in mid-February the Council sent consultation letters to School 3 and School 4. After naming School 2 in the plan the Council sent two consultation letters to special schools in March, seven consultation letters in July and one in August.
92. Without pre-determining the result of Mrs X’s appeal against section I of Y’s EHCP the Council failed to carry out the right key stage transfer for Y by:
    • If its position was School 2 was suitable for Y and could meet his SEN – failing to arrange transition and prepare placement for Y;
    • If the Council accepted Y needed a specialist placement – failing to consult in a timely manner with potentially suitable provisions.
93. The Council’s failings amount to fault. This caused Y and Mrs X injustice by creating uncertainty about the next stage of Y’s education, which, especially for a child with ASD, must have been distressing and detrimental to his mental health and well-being.

Back to top

Agreed action

94. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, we recommend the Council complete within four weeks of the final decision the following:
    • apologise to Mrs X for the injustice caused to her and Y by the faults identified;
    • pay Mrs X £450 a month to recognise Y’s loss of education and special educational provisions caused by part-time school attendance with lack of alternative provision and non-delivery of all the special educational provisions included in his EHCP from December 2020 to October 2021. The total the Council should pay is £3,600 for the period of eight months from December 2020 till October 2022, excluding three months for the Christmas break, Easter break and three half-terms;
    • pay Mrs X £600 a month to recognise Y’s loss of education and special educational provisions caused by lack of alternative provision and non-delivery of the special educational provisions included in his EHCP from November 2021 to mid-July 2022. The total the Council should pay is £4,200 for the period of eight and a half months from November 2021 till mid-July 2022, excluding one and a half months for the Christmas break, Easter break and two half-terms;
    • pay Mrs X £600 to recognise the distress caused to her by the Council’s prolonged failure to secure education and SEP for Y as well as failure to consider her requests for Personal Budget;
    • consider Mrs X’s request for Personal Budget.

The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

95. The Council will pay Mrs X £600 per month from the beginning of September 2022 to the end of March 2023 or until the suitable interim provision is made available for Y, whichever is sooner. The Council should provide us with evidence it has made the payments and arranged the suitable interim provision.
96. We recommend the Council within four weeks of the final decision ensure all SEN case officers and their managers review:
    • DfE School Attendance: guidance for schools, August 2020;
    • The Council’s Personal Budget policy and Direct Payments guidance;

The Council will provide us with the evidence the above action has been completed.

Back to top

Final decision

97. I found fault with the Council for not providing suitable education to Y, not delivering all special educational provision for him, in the way the Council handled Personal Budget request from Mrs X and carried out Y’s key stage transfer. The Council’s fault caused injustice to Mrs X and Y. The Council has accepted my recommendations so this investigation is now at an end.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page