Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about which setting is suitable for a child’s education as Ms X appealed to the Tribunal. We cannot investigate how a school provides free school meals.

The complaint

1. Ms X says the Council has failed to provide a suitable education to her child, B, and has failed to provide B with free school meals.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate most complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(2), as amended)
3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the SEND Tribunal in this decision statement.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Ms X which included the Council’s reply.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. B has an Education Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan). The Council issued an amended final EHC Plan in June 2024. It named School Y as the educational setting. The Council says School Y was the parents preference. Ms X says it became clear to her that School Y could not meet B’s needs. She said B needed Education Other than At School (EOTAS). The Council disagreed. Ms X appealed to the Tribunal. That appeal continues. Ms X says the Council should provide EOTAS while the Tribunal continues. The Council says B is on School Y’s roll and it can arrange alternative provision.
8. Ms X says that B is eligible for free school meals. She says B has not received these since June 2024. The Council says this is School Y’s responsibility as B is on School Y’s roll. School Y says that as B is not attending School Y it is the Council’s responsibility.
9. Ms X says the Council should not have written to her in March 2025 warning her it could impose contact with the Council restrictions upon her if her behaviour was unreasonable. It set out what unreasonable behaviour is and why it had written to her. We will not investigate this, as there is no significant injustice caused to Ms X by this letter. It has not prevented her from receiving services.

Analysis

10. We cannot investigate whether School Y is the appropriate setting or EOTAS is appropriate as Ms X has appealed to the Tribunal.
11. The responsibility for providing free school meals to pupils who are on a school’s roll, lies with that school. For the reasons set out in paragraph two we cannot investigate what happens in schools and this includes free school meals provision.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint because we cannot investigate matters which a Tribunal is considering and we cannot investigate how a school provides free school meals. There is no significant injustice caused by a Council contact restrictions warning letter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman