Summary: Mr X complains about the Council making a comment to an appeals panel that he was known to the Council, and that the Council refused to agree to his requested reasonable adjustment for video calls. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mr X by the likely fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council made a comment to an appeals panel that he was known to the Council. He says this prevented him from effectively representing the parents at the appeal. He also complains the Council refused to agree to his requested reasonable adjustment for video calls.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 an investigation if we decide:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained,
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome,

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X took part in a school appeals panel representing the parents of the child.
7. Before the appeal hearing, the panel met with the clerk. This is normal process and usually consists of discussion around the administration of the appeal hearing. Discussions regarding who will be representing the parents is also not unusual.
8. Mr X considered the clerk had discussed him and his history with the Council with the appeal panel in this meeting. The Council accepted during its complaints response that the clerk had informed the panel Mr X was known to the Council. However, the Council said this was to ensure the panel hearing was managed effectively and not for any other purposes.
9. There is a lack of evidence regarding what was discussed during the meeting held between the clerk and panel members. Given the conflicting evidence between what Mr X said and what the Council said, it is unlikely an investigation would lead to any findings or worthwhile outcomes. Therefore, an investigation on this point is not justified.
10. Mr X made a complaint to the Council about this matter. As part of this complaint, Mr X requested the Council hold video calls with him as a reasonable adjustment. The Council, in response to our enquiries, confirmed it agreed to this request but it failed to confirm this in writing with Mr X.
11. The Council also accepted it cancelled an arranged video call with Mr X and failed to rearrange it. The Council instead sent Mr X written correspondence as it did not consider it would significantly disadvantage him.
12. If we were to investigate, it is likely we would find fault with the Council for failing to provide Mr X’s agreed reasonable adjustments. This is because the Council cancelled the arranged video call and failed to rearrange it. In addition, the Council was not able to evidence how, and why, it considered sending Mr X written correspondence would not significantly disadvantage him.
13. We therefore asked the Council to consider remedying the injustice caused to Mr X by reminding staff:
• Of the Council’s duty to make reasonable adjustments to a disabled person who would otherwise be placed at a disadvantage in accessing the Council’s services.
• Where the Council does not consider a request to be reasonable, the Council should keep records showing clear consideration for how and why it made its decision.
• The Council should write to individuals to outline its decision, and reasons, on whether it agrees to the requested adjustments.
14. We also asked the Council that, moving forward, should Mr X make new complaints and request reasonable adjustments, the Council should consider his request to decide whether it is a request it will agree to. The Council will then confirm in writing what adjustments it has agreed to.

Back to top

Agreed action

15. To its credit, the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint and will do the above within four weeks of the final decision statement.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We have upheld this complaint because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman