Summary: We have found fault with the Council for delaying its section 19 decision. This left Mr X’s daughter without education for 9 months when she was unable to attend school. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to consider its section 19 duty when his daughter, Y was unable to attend school on mental health grounds. He said the failure to secure suitable alternative provision meant that Y has been without education since September 2024.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I 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. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may recommend a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
5. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have investigated the Council’s approach to its Section 19 duties in Y’s case. I have not investigated the actions of the schools as this is outside our jurisdiction.
7. Mr X brought his complaint to us in October 2025. Anything that took place before this date is considered a late complaint and section 26B applies. I have not exercised discretion to investigate back further as I have seen no good reason why Mr X did not complain sooner. As a result, my investigation covers the period between October 2024 and October 2025.
8. I cannot investigate matters which took place after Mr X brought his complaint to us. However, I can consider any ongoing injustice arising from the alleged fault that occurred earlier.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

Section 19 duty

11. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that a council must arrange suitable alternative educational provision when it finds that a child is unable to attend school because of a permanent exclusion, an illness, or for any other reason which make the school inaccessible to the child. The alternative educational provision must be suitable to the child’s age, ability and aptitude, and any special educational needs they have.

Establishing a section 19 duty

12. If a council discovers a child is absent from school for an extended period, it should consider the reasons for this, and take account of evidence from relevant parties (such as the child’s school, parents, and medical professionals). It must then decide whether it has a duty to make alternative educational provision.
13. If a council wants to see medical or other evidence, it should ask for it at the earliest opportunity. The council should account for any challenges a parent might have in obtaining evidence, and review its position based on any new evidence it receives.
14. Councils should consider any attempts the school is making to support the child. This might involve sending work home for the child to complete, arranging disability related support, placing the child on a reduced timetable, or providing online education as a short-term measure. If there is a clear, effective, and time-bound plan for reintegration then there may be no immediate role for a council in providing alternative education.

Arranging person centred provision

15. If a council decides it must arrange alternative provision, it needs to arrange provision based on the child’s individual needs. It should also have a review process to ensure the provision remains in the child’s best interests. Councils can decide a child cannot cope with full-time provision, especially where the reason for their non-attendance is medical. When this happens, a council should provide reasons for the amount of provision it arranges.
16. If a child has an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan the council also has an ongoing duty to arrange the support guaranteed by the Plan. However, this might not always be possible, such as where the SEN support is designed for the child’s normal classroom setting.
17. Councils should also think about the steps needed to reintegrate the child back into their usual school setting, through ongoing conversations with relevant professionals and the parents.

School absence

18. We cannot consider the actions of a school in declining to authorise absence or in issuing a penalty notice. We cannot consider the actions of a court. These matters are ruled out by Schedule 5 of the LGA 1974.

What happened

19. This is just a summary of the key points that I considered as part of my investigation. It is not intended to be a full chronology.
20. In 2024, Mr X’s daughter, Y struggled with her mental health, which impacted on her school attendance. The school offered some support and Y had sessions with mental health professionals and an educational psychologist and occupational therapist assessed her.

Section 19

21. In November 2024, Y changed schools, but her attendance issues continued. In December, Mr X contacted the Council to report that Y had moved schools, but the gradual transition meant that she was missing education.
22. In January, the Council held meetings and provided advice and support to the school and Y’s parents to help Y’s transition.
23. In 2025, Y continued to struggle with attendance. The school marked her absence as unauthorised. It said that without medical evidence, it could not authorise her absence.
24. Mr X contacted the Council in April and again in June to request alternative provision (AP) under Section 19.
25. The Council discussed Y’s case at a panel meeting in May. The Council agreed to provide Y with extra support from the inclusion service to help remove barriers to school attendance. Y had been receiving support from this service prior to Mr X’s request for AP. In addition, the Council secured two hours a week of teaching from a specialist service. The panel agreed that full-time provision would not be appropriate at that stage.

Provision secured

26. In June 2025, Mr X complained to the Council about its failure to secure suitable AP for Y. The Council responded in August. It said that following Mr X’s request for AP in April, the Council acted appropriately and in a timely manner. It said that it arranged suitable support for Y. It also said that it would review the support plan at the end of autumn half term. It did not uphold Mr X’s complaint.
27. In September, Y accessed AP that specialised in social, emotional and mental health (SEMH) which supports children experiencing emotionally based school avoidance (EBSA). The Council deemed this to be suitable AP for Y given her attendance issues related to anxiety. The Council said this provider had been working with Y and her family prior to the section 19 request and had developed a strong relationship with the family.
28. The AP placement broke down after 10 weeks.
29. In October 2025, Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman.

Update

30. Between November 2025 and April 2026, the Council secured a further three providers. The Council maintained regular contact with the family and kept Y’s support plan under review. It responded to Y’s parents’ concerns and changed the support accordingly. When Y struggled to engage with the various provision put in place, the Council reassessed her needs and secured alternative AP. Y remains out of school.

My findings

Delayed section 19 decision and start of alternative provision

31. The Council became aware that Y was struggling with school attendance in November 2024. It did not consider its section 19 duty until May 2025. This was fault.
32. During this period, the Council was in contact with Y’s school and was supporting her reintegration into school. However, it did not consider whether it had a duty to secure suitable alternative provision until 6 months later.
33. It then took a further 3 months for Y to access the provision.
34. The Council’s delay in making a section 19 decision and securing alternative provision meant that Y was without education for 9 months (2.5 school terms).
35. In line with our guidance on remedies, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and make a symbolic payment of £2500 in recognition of the missed education.

Suitability of alternative provision

36. Between September 2025 and April 2026, the Council secured four different alternative education providers. The last three providers were secured after Mr X brought his complaint to us and therefore, I have not investigated the Council’s actions in relation to these.
37. I have seen evidence that the Council properly considered and identified a provider that offered the right environment and content to meet Y’s needs. It also kept the AP under review and changed provider when requested by Y’s parents and after the Council had assessed its suitability.
38. In making its decision to select the AP, the Council took account of the relevant guidance, information from professionals, its own policies and information from you. The Council followed the appropriate procedures when making this decision and I cannot therefore criticise it.
39. As a result, I have found no fault with how the Council reached its decision to secure the AP. The placement broke down, but I do not consider this to be the fault of the Council.

Delayed complaints process

40. The Council was delayed in responding to Mr X’s complaint. This was fault that caused avoidable frustration and distress in an already difficult situation.
41. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment of £200 in recognition of the distress caused.

Back to top

Agreed action

42. Within 4 weeks of my decision, the Council will:
1. Apologise to Mr X for failing to make a section 19 decision when it first became aware that Y was not attending school.
2. Make a symbolic payment to Mr X of £2500 in recognition of the missed education.
3. Apologise to Mr X for the delayed response to his complaint.
4. Make a symbolic payment of £200 in recognition of the distress caused by the delayed complaint process.
43. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

44. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman