Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alledged failure by the Council to provide the complainant’s daughter alternative education provision in 2023 which resulted in her incurring solicitors costs. This is because the complaint is late and it could and should have been brought to us much sooner. We therefore have no jurisdiction to investigate the issues raised.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Ms Q) complains about an alledged failure by the Council to provide her daughter with suitable alternative education in 2023 while she was too unwell to attend school. She also complains that she had to instruct solicitors in the same year to get the Council to comply with its duty to make provision of alternative education which ought not to have been necessary.
2. In summary, Ms Q says she incurred legal costs of approximately £7,500 as a result of the alledged fault. As a desired outcome, she wants the Council to reimburse her costs and improve its practices.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The legal restriction I outline at paragraph four (above) inserts a time limit for a member of the public to bring their complaint to the attention of the Ombudsman. Its intention is two-fold: to provide us with the best opportunity of arriving at a robust, evidence-based decision on complaints about recent events and to ensure fairness by enabling us to decline an investigation into historic matters, which could and should have formed the basis of a complaint to us far sooner.
7. The evidence shows Ms Q became aware of problems with respect to the suitability of alternative education of provision in June 2023 which is when she instructed solicitors to write to the Council challenging this. Considering Ms Q did not bring her complaint to us until January 2025, this is therefore late. I considered whether there are good reasons for us to exercise our discretion and investigate notwithstanding the passage of time. However, the evidence suggests Ms Q could have raised these issues with us sooner and during the time we previously considered a separate complaint Ms Q raised in 2023. Instead, Ms Q chose to pursue such matters using a legal route. It is my view this issue could and should have formed the subject of a complaint to us much sooner. I will not therefore exercise my discretion.
8. In any event, considering we have jurisdiction to investigate complaints about alternative education provision, I take the view that Ms Q incurring legal costs about such matters were an avoidable expense which it would not be reasonable for us to recommend be reimbursed. Therefore, it is unlikely we could achieve the outcome being sought.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the restrictions I outline at paragraphs three and four (above) apply.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman