Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to withdraw her child’s school placement. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s decision to withdraw her child’s school placement. She says this disrupted her child’s education.
2. Miss X wants the Council to apologise, review its decision and to reinstate her child’s placement.

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 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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or

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

4. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
6. 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)
7. 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

8. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
9. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. The evidence I have seen shows:
• The Council decided to withdraw Miss X’s child from their school after receiving several safeguarding referrals and reports about practices at the school.
• The Council offered alternative school placements and other educational provision, however Miss X declined these.
• The Council later arranged an annual review of the child’s Education, Health and Care Plan.
• Miss X’s child returned to school shortly after the withdrawal decision, however the Council no longer funded the placement as it deemed the school unsuitable.
11. Councils have a duty to investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. They must decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. (Children Act 1989, section 47)
12. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify us investigating. The Council’s decision to withdraw Miss X’s child was taken in line with its safeguarding duties. It later offered alternative schooling options while it considered the school was unsuitable. The action is what we would expect for a Council to take in such circumstances. We cannot question the Council’s decision where there is not enough evidence of fault.
13. The injustice is also not significant enough to justify us investigating. The evidence I have seen shows the child missed six days of schooling. Although the Council no longer funded the placement after the child returned to the school, it offered alternative school placements that it would have funded. Miss X chose not to accept those offers.
14. Following the annual review, Miss X had a right of appeal to the Tribunal if she disagreed with the school named in her child’s the Education, Health and Care Plan. I have seen no evidence to suggest it would be unreasonable for her to use that right of appeal. Therefore, I cannot investigate this aspect of complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault and the injustice is not significant enough to justify us investigating. It was reasonable for Miss X to appeal to the Tribunal if she disagreed with the outcome of the annual review.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman