Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a debt accrued for school meals and recovery action by the Council. This is because we have no powers to consider what happens in schools. The complaint is also late and there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council allowed her to accrue a debt of around £1000 for school meals taken by her children. The debt relates to meals taken between 2012 and 2018. Mrs X says the Council should have stopped her children receiving meals before the debt became so large. Mrs X says she is happy to pay half of the debt.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(b), as amended)
3. 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)
4. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered Mrs X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information she provided. I also gave Mrs X the opportunity to respond to a draft statement before reaching a final decision on her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

6. The Council has responded to complaints from Mrs X about the debt she has accrued for meals taken by her children. In its stage 2 response to Mrs X sent in April 2019 the Council said:
• Mrs X’s two children did not qualify for free school meals.
• Schools are not obliged to provide children with a meal without payment or eligibility for free school meals. But Mrs X did not send her children to school with sandwiches or say she did not want them to have a school meal.
• Mrs X made occasional payments toward the cost of her children’s meals, but they were not enough to cover the costs of meals taken. Regular reminders were therefore sent.
• Between 2013 and 2017, the school wrote to Mrs X on 22 occasions about the debt. The school referred the matter to the Council’s Facilities Management (FM) team as it manages the school’s catering. The FM team wrote to Mrs X 13 times between 2012 and 2018.
• From 2017, Mrs X could access information about school meal payments using the online ‘Parent Pay’ system.
• Invoices were sent in February 2015 for £519.95, October 2016 for £257.25, and January 20218 for £295.10.
• The Council would not write off the debt for the reasons set out above. The outstanding debt was c£700 and the Council had agreed an instalment plan with Mrs X of £25 per month.

Assessment

7. The Local Government Act 1974 makes it clear the Ombudsman cannot consider complaints about what happens in schools. The decision to give Mrs X’s children school meals was taken by her children’s school. This decision itself is therefore outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction with no discretion to investigate.
8. The Council has also been involved since 2012 through its pursuit of the outstanding debt. But, the Ombudsman normally expects people to complain to us within twelve months of them becoming aware of a problem. We look at each complaint individually and on its merits, considering the particular circumstances of each case. But we do not exercise discretion to accept a late complaint unless there are clear and compelling reasons to do so.
9. The events at the heart of Mrs X complaint date back seven years. I see no reason Mrs X could not have complained to us earlier. Mrs X’s complaint is therefore late, and I see no reason we should exercise our discretion to consider it. In reaching this decision, I have taken into account the point I make below.
10. The Council and school regularly wrote to Mrs X about the increasing debt. Mrs X had the opportunity to send her children to school with sandwiches – but chose not to. Mrs X failed to say she did not want her children to have a school meal. Mrs X could have prevented the debt from accruing - but she did not. So, even if we were to investigate, I do not think it is likely we would find fault by the Council, or injustice to Mrs X. The Council is simply pursuing payment for meals the school provided to Mrs X’s children.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because we have no powers to consider what happens in schools, the complaint is late, and there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman