Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions relating to an Education, Health and Care plan. Mr X has appealed to the SEND Tribunal about this, and the law does not allow us to investigate here. Nor will we investigate Mr X’s other complaints about how the Council communicated with him, because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X said an Education, Health, and Care (EHC) Plan the Council wrote was so poor, he had to appeal to the SEND Tribunal. He said the Council were also responsible for delays during the hearings process. Mr X said this caused him unnecessary expense and inconvenience.
2. Mr X also said he was dissatisfied with how the Council communicated with him over decisions relating to education provision for his son and this caused him distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. 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.
6. 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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mr X said he was unhappy with the content of his son’s EHC Plan, specifically that it did not reflect his special educational needs and his special educational provision. Because of this Mr X appealed to the SEND Tribunal. He also complained the Council missed a SEND Tribunal deadline to carry out an action.
10. We cannot investigate these parts of Mr X’s complaint Mr X has lodged an appeal with the SEND Tribunal and the law I have highlighted at paragraph 4 means we cannot consider these matters.
11. Mr X was also unhappy with the Council’s communication about:
• Consultations with schools, and;
• Education provision.
12. I have considered Mr X’s initial complaint and the Council’s responses, including a stage 2 review carried out by a person not involved in the service area Mr X was complaining about. I am satisfied they provide a reasonable response and considered explanation of the Council’s actions and have identified appropriate learning for the Council. Because of this, I find further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because part of it we cannot investigate and of the parts we could investigate, any further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman