Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about education other than at school and Mrs X’s son’s special educational needs. The matters complained of are not separable from the question of what educational provision is most suitable for him, which is for a Tribunal to decide.

The complaint

1. Mrs X said the Council failed to provide support for her son’s education despite educational settings being inappropriate for him. She said the Council connived with school staff to suggest that elective home education would be the only option.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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)
3. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the SEND Tribunal in this decision statement.
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
5. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mrs X’s son has special educational needs (SEN) by virtue of disability. He has an Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan. Mrs X said she noticed that her son made greater progress during lockdown restrictions when his primary classes were virtual. She wanted this to continue rather than him returning to the classroom, where she said he would make less progress and be at risk of contracting Covid-19.
9. All the matters in dispute between Mrs X and the Council centre on the suitability or not of the child’s primary school to make the SEN provision he needs. They also concern Mrs X’s claim that the Council’s decision is disability discrimination. The Council has advised her of her right to request an amendment of her son’s EHC Plan and to appeal to the SEND Tribunal if she does not agree with its decision.
10. The Council’s offer of £250 is in recognition of issues with its complaint handling.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the matters she complains of are not separable from the content and location of her son’s educational provision. She has a right to resolve these issues via an appeal to the SEND Tribunal it would be reasonable to use. Issues of disability discrimination are also for the Tribunal, or a court, and it would be reasonable for Mrs X to pursue the most appropriate route. That being so, it would not a good use of public resources to investigate the Council’s complaint handling.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman