Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s actions around issuing School Attendance Orders. It is not appropriate for us to investigate as Parliament provided other options to challenge the Orders.

The complaint

1. Mrs X says the Council has harassed her by issuing her with School Attendance Orders and communicating about them.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. 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)(b), as amended)
3. We have the power to start or end an investigation into a complaint about actions the law allows us to investigate. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been mentioned as part of the legal proceedings regarding a closely related matter. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended, section 34(B))
4. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X electively home educates her two children. The Council has a duty to ensure that every child is in receipt of an education. The guidance says the Council should annually check electively home educated children are receiving a suitable education, in order to meet its s19 Education Act 1996 duty.
8. The Council says that it contacted Mrs X for evidence of the education she had provided in 2023 and 2024 and Mrs X did not provide it. It issued a School Attendance Orders under s437 Education Act 1996 in April 2024. It says in reply to Mrs X’s complaint that it later revoked these orders.
9. Mrs X says she feels harassed by the Council. She says its monitoring is unlawful. She says it is having a profound negative effect on her family’s lives.

Analysis

10. Once a Council issues a School Attendance Order, the parents have the right to request it is revoked. If the Council refuse to do so, the parents can appeal to the Secretary of State. Alternatively, if the parents decide not to comply, the Council can prosecute the parents. They then have the opportunity to defend themselves in the criminal court. Because Parliament set up options for parents to challenge the Orders, it is not appropriate for us to investigate whether the Council should have issued the School Attendance Orders.
11. We cannot decide if the Council’s actions amount to harassment. Only a court can decide that.
12. The Council has provided a detailed explanation of why it acted as it has. It is unlikely our investigation could add to that.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because Parliament set up options to challenge the School Attendance Orders and it is not appropriate for us to investigate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman