Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mrs M’s son B’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This is because Mrs M appealed to the SEND Tribunal. We cannot investigate a complaint about matters someone has appealed.

The complaint

1. Mrs M’s son B has an education, health and care (EHC) plan maintained by the Council. Mrs M complained the Council had not secured a place for B at either of her preferred secondary schools. Mrs M says the Council used out of date information when consulting the schools and believes this is why they refused to admit him. She complained the Council discussed B’s case with a neighbouring council.

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 cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. 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.
5. Where we are not prevented from investigating a complaint, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement,
• there is another body better placed to consider the complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mrs M and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Both Mrs M’s preferred schools said they could not meet B’s needs. Mrs M believes this is because the Council sent out-of-date information when it consulted the schools. She believes the Council should have used its powers to direct one of the schools to admit B.
9. Mrs M appealed to the SEND Tribunal. She asked the Tribunal to name one of her preferred schools in B’s EHC Plan and secure him a place.
10. It is not possible to separate Mrs M’s complaint (about the way the Council handled consultations) from her appeal (Mrs M’s request to name her preferred school in B’s Plan).
11. As Mrs M has appealed to the SEND Tribunal about the matter, we cannot investigate her complaint.
12. Mrs M complained the Council discussed B’s case with a neighbouring council when officers from both councils met a conference. She believes this was a data breach.
13. The Council was required to consult the neighbouring Council as it maintains one of Mrs M’s preferred schools. Consultations should be undertaken formally and confidentially. There is no evidence the alleged data breach caused Mrs M significant disadvantage. Investigation by us would not change the outcome. We will not, therefore, investigate the matter. Mrs M could raise her concerns directly with the Information Commissioner. The Information Commissioner considers complaints about data protection.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mrs M’s complaint because she appealed to the SEND Tribunal about the same matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman