Summary: We will not investigate Mrs Q’s complaint about special educational needs provision for children in Cheshire East Council’s area. This is because Mrs Q’s injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, nor will further investigation lead to a different outcome. And we cannot investigate what happened in Mrs Q’s children’s school.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I have called Mrs Q, complained about special educational needs provision for children in Cheshire East Council’s area. In particular, Mrs Q complained about the Council’s response to her complaint about the matter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:

• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot investigate complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(b), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Mrs Q provided. I considered the complaint correspondence the Council provided. I invited Mrs Q to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mrs Q has children who have special educational needs. We have considered two complaints from her about the Council’s handling of their special educational provision. We upheld both complaints. Mrs Q also made complaints to her children’s school.
6. Mrs Q later contacted the Council about her concerns about special educational provision at her children’s school, and how other children at the school and more widely might be affected by this. The Council held meetings with parents to get their views and agreed an action plan.
7. Mrs Q remained dissatisfied with the Council’s handling of the matter, the meetings, and the meetings’ outcomes. She complained to the Council about the actions of named council officers and the Clerk to the Governors of her children’s school.
8. The Council sent Mrs Q a detailed response to her complaint. It did not uphold the majority of her complaints, but partially upheld some. Mrs Q later complained to us about the content of the Council’s response. She made 39 complaints about the response, which were primarily about the Council’s failure to respond to all her queries and comments. She also complained the Council did not say what it would do to ensure pupils at her children’s school received satisfactory special educational needs provision. And she said it had not taken any further action such as arranging further meetings or monitoring her children’s school’s special educational provision.
9. Among other things, Mrs Q said she had no confidence in the integrity or objectivity of the Council’s complaint process. She said she was concerned the Council had taken no action to discourage her children’s school from spending money on legal advice and for paid complaint panel members. She believes the money could be used for special educational provision.
10. Mrs Q wants the Council to respond to all her queries, to set up a meeting previously promised, and to write to schools discouraging the use of paid panel members at complaints hearings.

Assessment

11. We will not investigate this complaint.
12. I recognise Mrs Q has strong views about the Council’s special educational provision for the children in its area. However, she did not suggest her own children have missed out on their own provision since we decided her previous complaints. So she has not suffered a personal injustice because of the Council’s alleged failings.
13. I also recognise Mrs Q is dissatisfied with the Council’s response to her complaint. In my view, the Council gave a comprehensive response. But even if this were not the case, it is not our role to provide answers to every criticism someone may make about a council. So it is unlikely further investigation by us will lead to a different outcome. Nor is the injustice Mrs Q may have suffered because of the Council’s failure to respond to all her concerns sufficient to justify our further involvement.
14. We cannot investigate any matters involving what happens in schools. This means we cannot investigate Mrs Q’s concerns about how her children’s school handles complaints or how it spends its money.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate this complaint for the reasons given in the Assessment.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman