Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to provide suitable alternative educational provision for the complainant’s daughter while she has been unable to attend school. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains that the Council has failed to provide suitable alternative educational provision for her daughter while she has been unable to attend school.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X says her daughter has been unable to attend school since January 2025. She says that, throughout this period, the Council’s duty to make alternative provision under section 19 of the Education Act 1996 has been engaged. She complains that it has not made appropriate alternative provision for her child.
6. The complaint correspondence shows that the Council has offered Teaching and Learning Provision (TLP) for Mrs X’s daughter. Mrs X says the TLP is not suitable for her daughter and she cannot access it. She further contends that the TLP was withdrawn when her daughter’s school took her off roll.
7. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. There is no dispute that the section 19 duty was engaged. Rather, the matter turns on whether the TLP constitutes appropriate provision. The Council believes that it does. Mrs X disagrees, and believes the evidence supports her. That is not something the Ombudsman can determine. The decision the Council took is properly set out in the complaint response and appears defensible. In the absence of evidence of fault in the way the Council made decision, the Ombudsman cannot criticise it, or intervene to substitute an alternative view.
8. The decision to take Mrs X’s daughter off roll was a matter for the school, not the Council, and does not therefore fall to be investigated. The Council has clarified that the TLP was not withdrawn. Given that Mrs X did not believe the TLP was appropriate in any case, there are no grounds for us to consider the matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman