Summary: We cannot investigate part of this complaint about the Council’s failure to organise full-time education for Q because the complainants appealed to a tribunal and the law says we cannot investigate. We will not investigate the remainder because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. X complained on behalf of Y and Z regarding their child Q. X complained the Council failed to:
1. secure the content of Y and Z’s child, Q’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan after they were permanently excluded from their school in February 2025;
2. provide a full-time alternative education to Q during their exclusion;
3. name a suitable school placement in Q’s EHC Plan following an annual review.
2. X said the matter caused distress, frustration and uncertainty for Y and Z. They said the matter impacted on Q’s education.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, an appeal to a tribunal or to a government minister, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)
6. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)
7. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Matters between early February 2025 and mid-May 2025

10. Q was permanently excluded from their school in early February 2025. The Council organised some tuition for Q on the sixth school day of exclusion in line with its statutory duties.
11. Y and Z complained the Council only provided seven hours of tuition initially, gradually increasing over time to 10 hours.
12. We will not investigate this complaint. Although the level of provision provided to Q may or may not have been equivalent to a full-time education, on balance, for the period we can consider, the injustice claimed is not significant enough to warrant an investigation.
13. The period we can consider covers a total of 49 school days. This is less than a full term of education, and Q received at least some provision. Therefore, the injustice claimed is not significant enough to warrant an investigation for this period.

Matters after mid-May 2025

14. In mid-May 2025 the Council made a new final EHC Plan for Q. The EHC Plan named a school in section I to start from September 2025 but did not name a placement for the period between mid-May 2025 to the end of the summer term in July 2025.
15. Y and Z complained the Council failed to secure the content of Q’s EHC Plan from mid-May 2025 and that the school named from September 2025 was unsuitable.
16. We cannot investigate this complaint. Y and Z appealed the content of Q’s EHC Plan to the SEND Tribunal. Because the Tribunal will now consider the content of the EHC Plan, including the named school in section I (or the lack of a named placement), the law says the Ombudsman cannot investigate how the Council secured the content of Q’s EHC Plan or provided education to them from the date of the new final EHC Plan in mid-May 2025.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We cannot investigate part of this complaint because the complainant appealed to a tribunal. We will not investigate the remainder because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman