Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council has dealt with matters concerning her child’s education. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains that the Council has not met the educational needs of her child, Z, for the last two and a half years. She says there is no consistency with staffing levels at Z’s school. She also complains that the Council has refused her request to continue with a previous taxi provider that transported Z to school.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In March 2023, the Council issued a final EHC plan for Z which included 1:1 provision of teaching staff at school. In September 2023 additional funding was provided to the school to recruit a new member of staff to support this provision.
8. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that suitable provision was not put in place in March 2023. This is because this element of her complaint is made late and I see no good reason why it could not have been made sooner.
9. Upon responding to Mrs X’s recent complaint, the Council found that the additional funding agreed in September 2023 was still in place as was the additional member of staff to support Z and therefore it concluded that the provision for 1:1 support was being met.
10. The Council found that the school had decided that an additional member of staff would support Z, increasing the staffing ration to 2:1. It recently amended Z’s EHC Plan to reflect this change.
11. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council has recently failed to ensure the provision in Z’s EHC plan was met. We accept it is not practical for councils to keep a ‘watching brief’ on whether schools are providing all the special educational provision in every child’s EHC plan. We expect them to quickly investigate and act on complaints or concerns raised that the provision is not in place at any time. Given the Council’s actions in this case there is insufficient evidence of fault.
12. There is also insufficient evidence of fault with how the Council managed Z’s home to school transport. It explained to Mrs X why the company had been changed. A senior manager considered a request from Mrs X to maintain the previous provided but concluded that the criteria for exceptional circumstances had not been met. In the absence of fault by the Council in the decision making process, we cannot question the merits of that decision.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman