Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to attend a mediation meeting, and its subsequent refusal to reimburse the complainant for costs she incurred as a result. Investigation would not lead to a different outcome and is not therefore warranted.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains that the Council failed to attend a mediation meeting concerning her child’s Education Health and Care (EHC) plan, and has refused to fully reimburse her for the costs she incurred as a result

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

-How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X requested mediation regarding the content of her son’s EHC plan. She complains that the Council failed to attend the scheduled mediation meeting, and failed to inform the participants in advance. Mrs X complains that the Council’s failure to attend caused emotional distress and financial loss.
6. Mrs X made a complaint to the Council about the failure to attend the mediation meeting. She requested reimbursement of the costs she said she had incurred. The Council upheld the complaint and apologised for its failure to attend and for the lack of notice.
7. Regarding the claim for reimbursement, the Council declined to cover the cost of Mrs X’s legal support. It also declined to accept responsibility for the time spent preparing for the meeting, on the grounds that it had offered to reschedule and this time was not therefore wasted. It did however offer to pay £400 in respect of the 2.5 hours the failure to attend had cost her. Mrs X believes the Council should reimburse her for the full amount she has requested.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because investigation would not lead to a different outcome. We will not normally consider complaints which have already been upheld and where there is nothing significant which has not already been established. That is the case here.
9. Turning to the financial remedy the Council has offered, the Ombudsman would not expect the Council to cover Mrs X’s legal costs. The mediation process can be pursued without legal representation and it was Mrs X’s choice to engage it. The Council’s argument that time spent preparing for the mediation meeting was not wasted, as a rescheduled meeting was made available, is defensible. In the circumstances of the case, the remedy the Council has offered is not demonstrably unreasonable. There are insufficient grounds for us to intervene and we will not do so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman