London Borough of Bexley (24 005 291)

Category : Education > Special educational needs

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 22 Nov 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss Y’s complaint that the Council failed to provide her son, Mr B, with suitable education, special educational needs provision and school transport. This is because these matters are all closely linked to a SEND Tribunal decision.

The complaint

  1. Miss Y complains on behalf of her child, Mr B, that the Council:
  • failed to provide Mr B with suitable alternative provision and the special educational provision in his Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan) when he was unable to attend school A;
  • failed to provide a suitable transition plan, that took into account Mr B’s mental health needs, as he transitioned to full-time education at school A;
  • removed Mr B’s midday school transport when he was expected to attend school full-time instead of part-time; and,
  • failed to arrange enough 1:1 support for Mr B at school A.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. 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.
  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 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

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. In September 2023, Mr B began attending school A on a part-time basis.
  2. Miss Y complains the Council failed to arrange a suitable transition plan for Mr B both ahead of his starting School A and then when moving from part-time to full-time attendance. Miss Y complains the Council removed Mr B’s midday school transport when it decided Mr B should attend full-time. She says that, when Mr B struggled to attend school, the Council failed to arrange suitable alternative provision, including the provision in his EHC Plan.
  3. During the period complained of, there was an ongoing appeal to the SEND Tribunal about the suitability of Mr B’s placement at school A and the provision in his EHC Plan. The Tribunal decided in May 2024 that school A was a suitable placement for Mr B.
  4. I cannot investigate Miss Y’s complaint about the suitability of school A or Y’s EHCP provision as the Tribunal considered this.
  5. I cannot investigate a complaint about provision while Mr B did not attend school A as his non-attendance was related to its suitability and so overlaps with the Tribunal’s consideration.
  6. I cannot investigate Miss Y’s complaint about transition planning as documents show the Tribunal considered this.
  7. I cannot investigate Miss Y’s complaint about the removal of mid-day school transport as the Council considered Mr B should attend school A full time. The complaint is, therefore, related to the suitability of the placement, which the Tribunal considered.
  8. Any complaints about educational provision following the Tribunal decision of May 2024 are premature. It is reasonable to expect Miss Y to complete the Council’s complaints process before contacting us, if needed.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We cannot investigate Miss Y’s complaint because we cannot overlap with the role of the SEND Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings