Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint that the Council was at fault in failing to address barriers to the complainant’s child’s education and in refusing to reimburse them for costs they incurred. This is because it concerns matters relating to the delivery of education by a school and, as such, falls outside our jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. The complainant says that the Council was at fault in failing to act to remove barriers to their child’s education and in refusing to reimburse the cost incurred in providing education otherwise than at school (EOTAS) which they sourced.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. We cannot investigate most complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(2), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The complainant says:
• their child has been diagnosed with severe anxiety, causing barriers to attending school;
• although the child did not have an Education Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan) their school accepted that EOTAS was required to enable them to access education. It should therefore have reimbursed the costs incurred sourcing the required provision some years ago; and
• a subject access request has demonstrated staff were at fault during the period.
6. In 2022 the complainant asked the Council to reimburse the costs incurred. The Council has declined to do so. The complainant wants it to reverse this decision, and to acknowledge the impact fault on its part has had on their family.
7. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint because it concerns the management of a child’s education by a school. The correspondence I have seen shows that the child was on the school’s roll throughout the period at issue and the Council’s duty to make alternative arrangements was not therefore engaged.
8. Where a pupil does not have an EHC Plan, the delivery of education remains the responsibility of the school, whether or not the provision is sourced from another provider. The delivery of education by a school is specifically excluded from the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction by law. We cannot therefore express a view on whether the costs of alternative provision were reasonably incurred or should be reimbursed.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We cannot investigate this complaint because it concerns matters relating to the delivery of education by a school.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman