Summary: We cannot investigate part of this complaint because it is about what happened in a school and the law prevents us from investigating such matters. We will not investigate part of this complaint about alternative education provision because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains about the Council’s failure to provide alternative education provision for her child (Z). She says Z has received little or no education for seven years.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate most complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(2), as amended)
4. 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Miss Y and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Miss Y says her child (Z) has had little or no education for seven years. She says Z’s attendance at school was poor, and that no alternative provision was put in place. The school is responsible for alerting the Council of concerns about school attendance, and the Council must consider its Section 19 duty (Education Act 1996) to arrange suitable alternative education provision. Miss Y says she believes the Council was aware when she raised concerns to the school, but the Council says it only became aware when Miss Y contacted it directly about this.
9. The law prevents us from investigating complaints about what happens in school and therefore we cannot comment on the school’s actions. We will therefore only consider part of this complaint, from when Miss Y contacted the Council and it became aware of Z’s attendance issues. I understand Miss Y feels alternative provision should have been considered much sooner. But we cannot criticise the Council for not considering this earlier, when it was not aware of the issues.
10. Once Miss Y contacted the Council for support, it considered its duty in line with the Education Act 1996. It engaged with Miss Y and professionals involved in Z’s care. A series of adaptations were agreed to facilitate Z’s reengagement with learning, and the Council determined it was not necessary to secure provision directly under Section 19. The Council also proceeded with an Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment at Miss Y’s request, and supported Miss Y in submitting an in-year transfer where a placement at a different school was secured.
11. I appreciate Miss Y feels this support should have been put in place many years earlier. I acknowledge the impact this has had on both her and Z. However, I am unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions for these delays, as it was not made aware of Z’s attendance issues until Miss Y contacted it about this. I am satisfied the Council took appropriate action once it became aware and properly considered its statutory duties. We will therefore not investigate this complaint further, as there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We cannot investigate part of Miss Y’s complaint because it is about what happened in a school and the law prevents us from investigating such matters. We will not investigate part of Miss Y’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman