Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse a personal budget application in relation to Mr Z’s education placement. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about how the Council has managed her son, Mr Z’s, education provision. Mrs X says the Council has failed to arrange accommodation to enable Mr Z to attend the education placement named in his Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan. Mrs X says as a result, the Council is failing in its duty to meet the provision in Mr Z’s EHC Plan.

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. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
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 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 a final EHC Plan for Mr Z, naming an education placement. Mrs X has appealed Sections B & F to the SEND Tribunal.
9. Mrs X asked the Council to provide Mr Z with a personal budget to cover the costs of accommodation. The Council refused, but did propose several options for home to school transport including offering to pay for train and taxi costs.
10. I cannot investigate Mrs X’s concerns about the contents of the EHC Plan because she has appealed to the SEND Tribunal.
11. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her request for a personal budget. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. It considered the request alongside relevant information and fully explained its reasons for refusing the request. With the absence of fault, the Ombudsman cannot question the merits of the decision made by the Council.
12. Mrs X feels the Council is failing to meet the provision detailed in Mr Z’s EHC Plan. However, there is no evidence of fault in this regard. The Council has named a placement in Mr Z’s EHC Plan, that place is available, and the Council has proposed transport which it considers to be suitable.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman