New children and education complaint decisions

A weekly update on children and education complaint decisions


Summary: The Ombudsman cannot not investigate Mr A’s complaint that the Council was at fault in its response to his request for school transport for his son. This is because Mr A has appealed to a tribunal.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a data breach involving her granddaughter. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is in a better position than the Ombudsman to deal with her concerns.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain about the way the Council issued care proceedings for their son. They complain that the Council failed to respond to requests for information and that the Council handled their complaint poorly. Mr and Mrs X say this caused them extreme stress and Mr X had to take lots of time off work to attend court hearings. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council for the way it administered the care proceedings process or the way it handled Mr and Mrs X’s complaint. The Ombudsman will not investigate the parts of Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s risk assessments and its decision to withdraw care proceedings because they are outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. The Ombudsman will not investigate the part of the complaint about requests for information because Mr and Mrs X have already complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s refusal to address a complaint he has made which relates to a court case involving a child. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because court proceedings fall outside our jurisdiction and the Council has confirmed it will consider the complaint once the legal proceedings are completed.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to reimburse the complainant’s costs incurred in his preparation for a Tribunal hearing. This is because the matter is out of jurisdiction.

Summary: Mr E says the Council failed to properly assess whether his children were suffering emotional abuse from their mother. When carrying out the assessment, the Council relied on historical information about him, which a previous Ombudsman’s investigation had said was wrong. There is evidence of fault in the Council using incorrect information about him and in not updating its files. The Council has agreed to make payments for time and trouble and distress, to consider whether social workers need additional guidance on emotional abuse and to share appropriate information with another council who are assessing Mr E’s other two children.

Summary: the Council followed its procedures by holding a disruption meeting and referring Mr and Mrs F’s case to the Fostering Panel following the breakdown of G’s placement. The Independent Review Mechanism upheld the Council’s decision to restrict Mr and Mrs F to short-term, holiday and respite placements. There was no fault by the Council.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to follow its child protection procedure after her children were put on a Child Protection Plan. I have discontinued my investigation. This is because the Local Safeguarding Children Board has considered Ms X’s complaint and made recommendations to the Council. It is unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman would lead to a different outcome.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council withholding part of a leaving care grant awarded to the complainant. This is because the complaint is made late and there are no good reasons to investigate the matter now.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel failed to provide her child with a place. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault which caused them to lose out on a school place.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr A’s complaint that the school admission appeal panel was at fault in refusing his appeal for a school place for his daughter. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part.

Summary: Mr L complains the Council failed to consider both him and his partner, Ms L’s, rights to a family life immediately before and following the birth of their child. The matters complained of took place too long ago so the investigation has been discontinued.

Summary: Mr F complains about the Council’s handling of a child protection investigation and conference. Mr F and the Council have agreed a settlement. I do not consider further investigation by the Ombudsman would lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Miss B complains that the Council has not properly dealt with her request for assistance as a person with no recourse to public funds. The Council was at fault because it delayed assessing Miss B’s needs. Miss B has missed out on financial support. The Council should apologise to Miss B and pay her £302 for the financial support she did not receive.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a delay in issuing an Education Health and Care Plan. The delay did not cause a significant personal injustice.

Summary: The Ombudsmen will not investigate Ms L’s complaint about her hospital admission and discharge arrangements. This is because it is unlikely the Ombudsmen would achieve anything further for her.

Summary: Mr B complains the Council refuses to correct his personal data. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Officer is better placed to consider Mr B’s concerns.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with her family. Some of the complaint is late, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council, and we cannot consider complaints about what happens in schools. If Miss X thinks the Council holds inaccurate information about her, then she should contact the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot and will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s children services team’s actions before Court proceedings, during the proceedings and afterwards. We cannot obtain more contact for Miss X with her children.

Summary: Ms X complains on behalf of her son Y about the way the Council handled his education over the past few years. She says it failed to: re-assess his needs; carry out annual reviews of his Statement of Special Educational Needs or Education, Health and Care Plan; ensure he received a full-time education or the provision detailed in his Plan; or carry out adequate transition planning when he was scheduled to attend a new school. In addition, she complains about the way it handled a safeguarding referral about Y. The Ombudsman has found the Council was at fault for failing to carry out an EHC needs assessment and not conducting sufficient enquiries to establish why Y was unable to attend school. It was also at fault for taking too long to arrange Y’s occupational therapy, poor recordkeeping, and the way it handled the safeguarding referral. These faults caused some uncertainty therefore we have recommended the Council makes a payment to remedy this injustice. It has agreed to carry out this recommendation.

Summary: Mr F complains the Council refused his request for free home to school transport for his daughter, G. The Ombudsman does not decide whether the Council should provide school transport for Mr F’s daughter, G. However, Mr F has not had an opportunity to present his case to an appeal panel. The Council has offered to invite Mr F to appeal, and to review its appeals process.

Summary: The Council was not at fault for the school admissions appeal panel’s consideration of Miss B’s appeal. As there was no fault in how the panel made its decision, the Ombudsman cannot question the decision itself.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the accuracy of the Council’s court report on her application for a special guardianship order. The Council has agreed to deal with the complaint at stage 3 of the statutory complaint procedure.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council has failed to properly consider requests for extra direct payments for her son’s care in light of clearly changing circumstances. The Ombudsman found there was some fault in the Council’s process. Although the overall decisions are ones it was entitled to take, our investigation has identified fault which only came about because of Ms X’s complaint to us. This caused Ms X an injustice in the form of her time and trouble and the Council agreed with our recommendation to remedy this with an apology and financial payment.