Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a fixed penalty notice for school non-attendance. This is because Miss X paid the penalty charge, so it is not appropriate for us to investigate it.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s decision to issue a fixed penalty notice (FPN) for her child’s absence from school. She says the Council did not properly consider her child’s special educational needs or adequately explain its decision. She says this caused her distress and financial loss.

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 Miss X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council issued Miss X with a FPN for her child’s non-attendance at school. Miss X complained to the Council, but the Council said it would stand. Miss X paid the penalty charge.
6. We will not investigate whether the Council should have issued the FPN. This is because Miss X paid the penalty charge. If she believed the FPN was unjustified, she need not have paid. The Council would then have had to decide whether to prosecute Miss X for her child’s non-attendance. If the Council had decided not to prosecute, Miss X would not have had to pay. If the Council had decided to prosecute, Miss X could have argued her case in court, and the court would have decided whether the Council was justified in taking action. That is the more appropriate route for deciding whether an offence has occurred.
7. Miss X also says that in its stage 2 response, the Council accepted faults in its record-keeping and reasoning but did not offer a remedy.
8. In its stage 2 response, the Council said it had properly exercised its discretion. It accepted its records did not clearly show how it reached its decision but said the FPN remained valid. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome for Miss X.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because she paid the penalty charge so it would not be appropriate for us to investigate whether the Council should have issued it.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman