Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to make appropriate alternative educational provision for the complainant’s daughter and failed to ensure the delivery of provision set out in her Education Health and Care Plan. Our intervention would not add anything significant to the outcome which has already been achieved and is not therefore warranted.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains that the Council has failed to make appropriate alternative educational provision for her daughter, and has failed to ensure the delivery of the provision set out in her Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X’s daughter has special educational needs and an Education Health and Care (EHC) plan. She has been unable to attend mainstream school since December 2023. Ms X complains that the Council has failed to make the alternative provision to which her daughter was entitled under section 19 of the Education Act 1996, and failed to secure the delivery of the provision set out in her EHC plan.
6. The correspondence Ms X has provided indicates that the Council accepts that its duty to make provision was engaged throughout the period. While it says some provision was made on a part-time basis, it accepts that it failed to secure the provision Ms X’s daughter was entitled to.
7. To remedy the complaint, the Council has apologised and offered symbolic payments totalling £3100. It has also set out action it intends to take to ensure appropriate provision is made for Ms X's daughter in future. Ms X does not believe the outcome recognises the severity of the impact of the lack of provision on her daughter or on her.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to investigate complaints which have been upheld before they come to us, and we will not normally do so. That is the case here. The Ombudsman’s intervention is not required to establish whether the Council has been at fault.
9. The financial remedy the Council has offered may not be at the level Ms X believes it should be. But it is broadly in line with what the Ombudsman would be likely to recommend, given the length of the period at issue and the fact that some limited provision was in place for part of it. That being the case, our intervention is not warranted.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because our intervention would not add anything significant and is not therefore warranted.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman