Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council issuing fixed penalty notices for school non-attendance. This is because it does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect them to have defended any claim made against them in the Magistrates Court.

The complaint

1. The complainants, whom I shall call Mr and Mrs X, say the Council should not have issued them with fixed penalty notices in November 2019 for their child’s non-attendance at school. They also say the Council has delayed in replying to their complaint.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr and Mrs X.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr and Mrs X say that in November 2019 the Council issued them each with a fixed penalty notice for their child’s non-attendance at school for four days caused by a family holiday. They chose to pay the reduced amount of £60 each. In January 2020, they complained to the Council. They said the reasons why they had been issued the notice was not clear or consistent with other families. They said it should not have been issued.
6. The Council completed its complaints process in December 2021. It refused to reimburse Mr and Mrs X for the £120 they had jointly paid.
7. If Mr and Mrs X did not agree with the fixed penalty notice then Parliament has provided a process for them to challenge it. This is, that if they did not agree and did not pay, then if the Council had then issued proceedings in the Magistrates Court they could have argued their case and defended their position. It is reasonable to expect them to have used that process.
8. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are not dealing with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because it does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect them to have defended any claim made against them in the Magistrates Court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman