London Borough of Bromley (19 003 111)

Category : Education > Special educational needs

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 16 Aug 2019

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to reimburse the complainant’s costs incurred in his preparation for a Tribunal hearing. This is because the matter is out of jurisdiction.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr T, complains that the Council:
    • Has refused to cover or contribute to his costs in preparing for a Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal (SENDIST) hearing; and
    • Has refused to accept the matter as a valid complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered the information provided by Mr T and I have sent him a draft decision for his comments.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Mr T complains that the Education and Health Care Plan (EHCP) drafted by the Council for his son was inadequate. He says that this caused him a considerable amount of expenditure in re-drafting the plan, with the assistance of educational experts, and in legal fees in preparing for a challenge to the EHCP at Tribunal.
  2. Although the Council subsequently withdrew its opposition, and the Tribunal the application, Mr T believes that the Council is responsible for his financial loss. The Council has refused to cover or to contribute to the costs, however. It has also refused to accept this matter as a valid complaint.
  3. Mr T has now brought the complaint to the LGSCO but we cannot investigate it. This is because it is out of jurisdiction. Once Mr T exercised his right to appeal to SENDIST regarding the content of the EHCP, the Ombudsman was no longer able to look at the matter.
  4. We are also unable to consider Mr T’s request for legal costs, as the Tribunal Order states that no order for costs would be made. We cannot look at any matter that a court has considered. If Mr T was unhappy with the Tribunal’s order, it needed to be challenged in the court.
  5. I find no fault in the Council’s refusal to investigate the complaint for the same reasons.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. Subject to any comments Mr T might make, my view is that the Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. This is because court proceedings were initiated with regard to this matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings