Lincolnshire County Council (25 008 152)
Category : Education > Special educational needs
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 03 Feb 2026
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about her son’s lack of progress at college 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
- Ms M is unhappy with the progress her son, B, made at college. B did not achieve the grades he hoped for in English and maths. Ms M believes the Council has let B down. She says B did not receive the provision in section F of his education, health and care (EHC) plan.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
- 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, or
- there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
- there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Ms M and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- I spoke with Ms M to ensure I understood her complaint. I am grateful to Ms M for taking the time to explain her concerns.
- I explained that I can only consider what happened in the 12 months before Ms M complained to us. Events before this are too old. This means I am only considering what happened since July 2024.
- Ms M described the problems she had with the college. She said she believed the college had failed B because he did not get the grades he was hoping for in maths and English. She said there were no six-weekly reviews, B did not have access to past exam papers, and the college had not provided any help for B to secure an apprenticeship. She believed the college was not following B’s EHC plan and the Council was responsible.
- In its response to Ms M’s complaint, the Council explained that it had reviewed B’s EHC plan regularly and was working with the college to ensure it continued to meet his needs. The Council had not secured a new assessment by a specialist teacher as Ms M requested, but had sought advice from the teacher for B’s plan.
- Ms M said that B has now left the college and started in Higher Education. She said she had complained to the college and intended to take the matter further. She said the Council had not formally ceased to maintain B’s plan, although it was no longer ‘active’.
- I have carefully considered everything Ms M said. I am sorry to hear she is unhappy with the progress B made at college. However, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify further investigation by us. We could not add to the Council’s response, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
- We can only consider the Council’s actions. We cannot investigate the college. In the circumstances, I consider Ms M’s complaint to the college is the best way to pursue her concerns. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable from further investigation of the Council by us.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify further investigation. We could not add to the Council’s response, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman