Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint that her son, B, failed to make progress at school. We do not have the expertise to assess whether he made as much progress as could be expected so we cannot achieve the outcome Ms M wants. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider Ms M’s complaint about the reasons the Council recorded for the breakdown of B’s school placement.

The complaint

1. Ms M complained that her son, B, failed to make progress at school during the last five years. She says this came to light following a recent educational psychology assessment which used age-related levels rather than p-levels and allowed her to understand for the first time how little progress he had made. Miss M believes the Council should pay compensation and provide catch-up provision.
2. Ms M also complained the Council said the breakdown of B’s school placement was the result of a breakdown in her relationship with the school rather than his social anxiety and school phobia. She is concerned B’s needs will not be met if the focus is on her relationship with the school rather than his needs.

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 do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider the complaint

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms M.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. B has an education, health and care (EHC) plan maintained by the Council. Ms M believes he failed to make progress at school because the Council did not properly identify his needs and failed to make suitable provision. The Council declined to consider Ms M’s complaint because it said it was too old.
7. Time is an issue for us, too. We would not generally investigate a complaint about something that happened more than 12 months ago. The more time that has passed, the harder it becomes to make practical recommendations to put things right if we find there was fault.
8. But more important than that, we are an administrative review body. Our job is to check that councils follow the correct procedures. We do not have the expertise to assess whether B made as much progress as could be expected. We cannot, therefore, achieve the outcome Ms M wants from her complaint.
9. If Ms M believes the Council has recorded information about the reason for the breakdown of B’s school placement that is untrue or incomplete, she can ask the Council to correct, delete or add more information. This is known as the ‘right to rectification’. If Ms M and the Council cannot reach an agreement, the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed than us to consider the matter.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint that B failed to make progress at school. We do not have the expertise to assess whether he made as much progress as could be expected so we cannot achieve the outcome Ms M wants.
11. Ms M can ask the Council to correct, delete or add more information to the reasons the Council recorded for the breakdown of B’s school placement. If Ms M and the Council cannot reach an agreement, the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed than us to consider the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman