Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about the placement named in her daughter’s Education, Health and Care Plan and about her daughter being without education. This is because she appealed to the SEND Tribunal about the content of the plan, so it is outside our jurisdiction. The lack of education was a direct consequence of the Council’s decision to name the placement so we cannot investigate this either. We have not investigated issues relating to administration before the plan was finalised, because this part of the complaint is late and there is no good reason why Miss X could not have complained to us sooner.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council failed to name a suitable school for her daughter Y, despite strong medical evidence provided and safeguarding concerns. She also complains about delays before the plan was finalised and about how the Council handled her concerns.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone had a right of appeal to a tribunal about the same matter, or could have taken it to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would have been unreasonable to expect the person to use these rights. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(6)(a) and 26(6)(c), 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. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. Y started a mainstream secondary school in September 2023. Miss X says it became clear that this placement was unsuitable and that Y stopped attending in November 2023.
9. The Council issued Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan in February 2024 and named a placement in July 2024. Y’s lack of education arose as a direct consequence of the Council’s decision to name that school in the plan.
10. When the Council issued the EHC plan and made its placement decision, Miss X appealed to the SEND Tribunal.
11. Miss X said she later withdrew her appeal from the Tribunal.
12. The Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate complaints where a complainant has exercised an alternative remedy, despite some of the alleged injustice suffered remaining unremedied.
13. I therefore cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about the naming of a school in Y’s plan or the missed education as this is directly linked to the matter Miss X appealed.
14. Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman in August 2025 and raised further issues with us after our initial assessment. As these matters relate to a period prior to July 2024, I consider the complaint late and I see no good reason to exercise discretion.

Back to top

Decision

15. I cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint as she used her appeal rights, so it is outside of our jurisdiction. The remaining part of her complaint is late, and I see no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate them now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman