Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with a young person’s education provision. This is because the Council’s decision to cease an Education Health and Care Plan had a right of appeal that it is reasonable for the complainant to have used. There is insufficient fault with how the Council dealt with a recent request for support.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council forced him to go to an inadequate school when it cancelled his Education Health and Care (EHC) plan in 2022. Mr X also complains that the Council ignored his requests for education in December 2023.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (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.
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)

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. Mr X previously had an EHC Plan. He complained to the Council about its decision to cease the EHC Plan in 2022, meaning he had to attend an inappropriate school. Mr X also complained about how the Council dealt with his request for support with his education in December 2023.
9. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to cease his ECH plan in 2022. This is because this decision had a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal that it is reasonable to have expected Mr X to have used. Only the SEND Tribunal can order a council to maintain an EHC plan that it has decided to cease.
10. I will also not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with Mr X’s request for support with his education in December 2023, because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council responded by telling Mr X how he could apply for a new EHC needs assessment so an education placement could be found. It also told him how he could apply for a supported internship. I have seen no evidence that Mr X made either application.
11. In his complaint to the Ombudsman Mr X also raises concerns about how the Council has supported his adult social care needs. Mr X did raise a complaint with the Council about this, but it appeared to be in relation to his education. The Council tried to clarify what Mr X’s complaint was about, but he did not respond so his complaint was closed. If Mr X does wish to complain about how his care needs are being met, he should raise this with the Council and complete it’s complaints process. If dissatisfied with its response, Mr X can then ask the Ombudsman to consider his complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to have expected him to use his right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal and because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman