Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about her son’s education because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. We could not add to the Council’s response, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs M complains about her son B’s education. B has an education, health and care (EHC) plan maintained by the Council.
2. B started school in September 2024. Mrs M withdrew him from school shortly after he started because of her concerns about his safety and the school’s ability to meet his special educational needs.
3. The Council arranged a meeting with the head teacher to discuss Mrs M’s concerns, but Mrs M decided she did not want B to return to the school.
4. The Council held a review of B’s education, health and care (EHC) plan on 10 October 2024. The Council issued a final amended Plan on 29 January 2025 which said B would attend a different special school from September 2025. The Council cancelled B’s previous school place agreed to arrange tuition until he started at his new school.
5. Mrs M complained to the Council about delays amending B’s EHC plan and securing an alternative school for him. She complained he was without a teacher for the deaf, a radio aid and a school place.
6. The Council responded on 9 April and 12 May 2025. The Council said it had been Mrs M’s decision to withdraw B from school. The school said it could meet B’s needs and was willing to discuss Mrs M’s concerns. The Council had reviewed B’s EHC plan and taken account of Mrs M’s views. The Council did not uphold Mrs M’s complaint.
7. Unhappy with the outcome, Mrs M complained to us.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

8. 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

11. I have carefully considered Mrs M’s concerns about B’s first school, the Council’s response to her concerns, and the steps the Council took to review and amend B’s EHC Plan.
12. The Council proposed a meeting with the school to address Mrs M’s concerns, undertook a review of B’s EHC plan when she did not agree and wanted a different school, completed the review in three weeks more than the maximum time allowed, and arranged alternative tuition when it was not possible to find another school where B could start straight away.
13. There is not enough evidence of fault in these actions to justify investigating Mrs M’s complaint.
14. We could not add to the Council’s response, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. We could not add to the Council’s response, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman