Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the school allocated to his child. This is because he has used his right of appeal to a tribunal. We will not investigate the Council’s handling of the matter. Any fault causing injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of the annual review of his son Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. He is unhappy with the school named in Y’s final EHC Plan. Mr X also complains about the Council’s communication.

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.
3. 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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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.

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. The Council issued the final EHC Plan in February 2024. Mr X has used his right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal about the school named in the EHC Plan. Therefore, I cannot investigate this element of his complaint.
9. After issuing the final EHC Plan, the Council agreed to consult again with Mr X’s preferred school. Mr X says he was incorrectly advised not to appeal to the SEND Tribunal until after the Council received a response from the school. While I appreciate Mr X is unhappy, there is not enough evidence of fault causing significant injustice to justify an investigation.
10. Mr X complains about the Council’s communication. He says it was difficult to reach the service. The Council apologised to Mr X for its delayed responses. I will not investigate this because any injustice is not significant enough.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint because Mr X has appealed to a tribunal placing it out of our jurisdiction. Further, any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman