Dorset Council (25 000 165)

Category : Education > Special educational needs

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 30 Jun 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her daughter’s Education, Health and Care needs assessment. This is because the injustice she claims stems from the Council’s decision not to issue her daughter an Education, Health and Care Plan and this decision carried a right of appeal which it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to use.

The complaint

  1. Mrs X complains the Council failed to obtain advice from the Occupational Therapy and Child and Adult Mental Health Services (CAMHS) as part of its assessment of her daughter’s special educational needs. She says this has resulted in a lack of suitable support for her daughter, who has been out of school since December 2024.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
  3. 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

  1. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mrs X asked the Council to obtain reports and advice from Occupational Therapy and CAMHS as part of her daughter’s education, health and care (EHC) needs assessment but it did not do so. It subsequently decided not to issue Mrs X’s daughter an EHC Plan but Mrs X says this has left her without the support she needs to attend school.
  2. While Mrs X is unhappy with the assessment process the impact of her concerns lies in the Council’s decision not to issue her daughter an EHC Plan. This decision carried a right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal which it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to use. The complaint therefore falls outside our jurisdiction as set out at Paragraph 3.
  3. In response to Mrs X’s complaint the Council agreed to obtain reports from Occupational Therapy and CAMHS as part of a review of its decision, but Mrs X says it has yet to do this. Should Mrs X wish to pursue this issue she would need to raise it with the Council in the first instance. Once the complaint has exhausted the Council’s complaints process, and if Mrs X remains unhappy, she may refer the matter to us to consider as a new complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to appeal to the Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings