Summary: We cannot investigate Ms T’s complaint that the Council failed to arrange suitable education for her child because she has used her right to appeal.

The complaint

1. Ms T complained the Council were late in arranging alternative education provision after her child, who has special educational needs, was excluded from a school. Ms T complained the Council then arranged an alternative school that was not suitable. Her child has missed education.

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 impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Ms T and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This document sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them. The EHC Plan is set out in sections. We cannot direct changes to the sections about their needs, education, or the name of the educational placement. Only the SEND Tribunal or the council can do this. 
8. It took the Council twelve educational days to name the alternative school on the EHC Plan and enrol Ms T’s child. It should arrange alternative provision by the sixth day after exclusion.
9. I will not investigate Ms T’s complaint about the delay in enrolling her child at the alternative school because this did not cause significant injustice.
10. Ms T did not send her child to the alternative school as she considered it was not suitable.
11. She asked for different alternative provision. The Council thought the school was suitable and did not arrange different provision.
12. Ms T has appealed the school placement named in her child’s EHC plan.
13. I cannot investigate Ms T’s complaint about missed education because the suitability of the alternative school is a matter for the SEND Tribunal.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not investigate Ms T’s complaint because the delay in arranging alternative provision did not cause significant injustice, and the suitability of the alternative school is a matter for the SEND Tribunal to consider.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman