Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the school named in her child’s Education, Health and Care plan and the lack of alternative education provision. Mrs X has used her right of appeal to the Tribunal about the contents of the plan. The matters are too closely linked to the appeal for us to investigate.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains that the school named in her daughters Education, Health and Care (ECH) plan cannot meet her needs and is not an appropriate setting for her. She says the Council refused her request for alternative education provision she has appealed to the Tribunal.
2. Mrs X also complained about another child being named in the Council’s response to her complaint.
3. Mrs X says this is having a significant impact on her daughter, Y, who is missing out on education and on her, because she is struggling to continue to work.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. 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.
6. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Y has an EHCP and was attending a mainstream school with specialist provision.
10. Mrs X raised concerns with the Council that the school was not meeting Y’s needs. The Council considered Mrs X’s concerns and decided that there was not enough information to support a change of school placement. It asked the school for more information and said it would review its decision when it received this.
11. We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint because she appealed to the Tribunal about the Special Educational Needs set out in Y’s EHCP, the provision and the named school.
12. The Council has agreed to amend the named school in Y’s EHCP.
13. We cannot investigate a failure to provide alternative educational provision, under the Council’s Section19 duty. The matters are too closely linked to the content of the EHC Plan, which Mrs X has used her right of appeal to challenge at the Tribunal.
14. This means that if a child is not attending school, and we decide the reason for non-attendance is linked to, or is a consequence of, a parent or young person’s disagreement about the educational placement in the EHC Plan, we cannot investigate a lack of alternative educational provision.
15. The reason for Y’s absence is related to Mrs X’s dispute about the suitability of the school placement so we cannot investigate any part of her complaint.
16. Mrs X complains about the Councils response to her complaint. I will not investigate this issue. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman