Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council conducted a child and family assessment in May and June 2017. She also complains it did not disclose information about her then partner’s full history of domestic violence during the assessment, nor did it do enough to support her and her children though this assessment and the others which followed. The Council has acknowledged it was at fault for failing to provide Ms X with a copy of the child and family assessment completed in June 2017. Likewise, it was at fault for not recording why C’s father or his childminder were not contacted during the assessment. However, we have found it was not at fault in relation to the other parts of the complaint. It has already acted to remedy the injustice caused by the faults that have been identified. Nevertheless, we recommend it shares this decision with its social workers to prevent these faults from reoccurring. The Council has agreed to carry out this recommendation.

Summary: Ms X complains that the Council failed to provide her with a financial payment and apology as recommended by the Ombudsman. Based on the evidence seen, the Ombudsman finds fault by the Council, but this did not cause Ms X significant injustice.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to clearly communicate its decision not to award his son his preferred choice of home to school transport provider. The Ombudsman finds the Council was not at fault.

Summary: there was no fault in the way the Independent Appeal Panel made its decision not to admit Mr F’s daughter to School B.   The Ombudsman cannot question decisions made without fault.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault and so we cannot question the merits of the panel’s decision.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about information sharing. There is no injustice caused to Miss X which needs a significantly further remedy than the apology the Council has already given.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to provide the provision of one to one support, as set out in her son’s EHCP, between February 2017 and July 2018. Ms X also complains about the Council’s complaint handling. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for failing to provide full time one to one support. The Ombudsman also finds fault with the Council’s complaint handling. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a financial payment.

Summary: Mrs B complains that the independent appeal panel failed to properly consider her appeal against the refusal of a place for her son, C, at his preferred school. The Ombudsman finds the appeal panel was at fault in that it disregarded information provided by C’s head teacher and by medical professionals. The Council has agreed to remedy for the injustice caused by offering Mrs B a new appeal.

Summary: Mr X complains that the independent appeal panel failed to consider his case properly when it considered his appeal for a school place for his daughter. The admissions authority has agreed to arrange a new appeal. The Ombudsman has discontinued his investigation on this basis.

Summary: The Council was at fault in delaying issuing an Education Health and Care Plan for Mrs X’s son, failing to put in place support set out in the Plan and failing to ensure he received all the alternative provision promised. The Council has agreed a suitable remedy.

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s failure to engage with her about concerns she has about her son’s welfare and its decision to restrict her contact with officers. She also complains about the failure to investigate other safeguarding and criminal concerns she has raised. The Ombudsman has found no fault in any of the matters complained about.

Summary: Mr B complains that the Council failed to progress his complaint through stage 3 of the statutory complaint’s procedure. I have discontinued this complaint. This is because the Council have now arranged a stage 3 review panel.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the care arrangements for her children. This is because they were decided by a court and are therefore outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Summary: Mr C complained his daughter, D, had been without appropriate education since December 2014. There is evidence of Council fault from October to November 2017 and the Council has been asked to consider approaching D’s specialists to identify what education and support it should now put in place.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council offered unsuitable home to school transport for her disabled son. There was no fault in the way the Council reached its view the offer of transport was suitable. There was fault as it delayed reaching this decision and delayed sending her the appeal forms. This caused Mrs X avoidable time and trouble and frustration. The Council has agreed to apologise to her and pay her £100 for the time and trouble caused by the delays in the transport appeal

Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of her son’s Education and Health Care Plans and its refusal to investigate her complaint, causing stress and financial loss. The Ombudsman cannot consider any complaints related to Mrs X’s appeal to the SEN Tribunal. The Ombudsman finds fault in the Council’s refusal to investigate Mrs X’s complaint but finds this did not cause significant injustice.

Summary: A parent complained about the way the school admission appeal panel dealt with her appeal concerning the refusal of a place for her daughter at her preferred secondary school. But the Ombudsman does not have reason to investigate this complaint because there is no sign of fault by the panel.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed finalising her son, Y’s, Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council was at fault as it delayed ensuring Y’s care and health needs were accurately reflected in his Education, Health and Care Plan and delayed making provision to meet his personal care needs. Y did not miss education because Mrs X met Y’s personal care needs to ensure he could attend college. It has agreed to apologise and pay her £3000 to acknowledge the personal care and support she provided to Y at college. It has also agreed to review its procedures to ensure it complies with its duties regarding post 16 Education, Health and Care Plans.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel and so we cannot question the merits of its decision.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council’s overpayment of fostering allowance has caused his family stress, anxiety and inconvenience. The Council has accepted it was at fault, and has offered a financial remedy to Mr X. We consider this remedies Mr X’s injustice.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to facilitate indirect contact between himself and his daughter and failed to share care team meetings relating to his daughter with him. The Ombudsman will not investigate this matter further as we could not add anything to the Council’s investigation or achieve anything more for Mr X by further investigation.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about the procedure followed when the complainant’s child temporarily taken into care. This is because the care decision was made by a court, and any matters relating to that decision are therefore out of our jurisdiction.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint the Council has failed to follow correct procedures for considering them as prospective adopters. This is because there is another agency better placed to consider the central issue and the Ombudsman cannot achieve the result Mrs B wants.

Summary: the Council did not take action to ensure that transport provided to Mr F’s disabled child in June and July 2018 met his identified special needs. This amounts to fault. The Council will take action to recognise the avoidable distress this caused to Mr F and his son by making a payment of £800.

Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of her daughter’s child protection case, which she says caused avoidable distress to her and her daughter. The Council is at fault for appointing an inexperienced social worker to lead the child protection process, not sharing reports and minutes in accordance with its policies and refusing a stage 3 panel. It should apologise and pay Mrs X £200 for distress caused by not being able to challenge minutes and reports in relevant meetings.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about contact with the complainant’s son. This is because it relates to a court order and is therefore out of our jurisdiction.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed reviewing the suitability of the school transport it provided for her child who has special educational needs. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault for not addressing soon enough the full extent of the reported problems with the school transport. The fault led to avoidable uncertainty, distress and expense for Ms X and both of her children. The Council has made a further offer to reimburse Ms X for expenses she incurred taking her child to school. The Council has also agreed to pay Ms X £300 to acknowledge the uncertainty and distress caused by the Council’s fault.

Summary: The Council delayed in completing the assessment of Ms F’s son’s special educational needs. This delay meant that her right to appeal to a Tribunal was also delayed as was the outcome of that appeal. Additional provision detailed as a result of the Tribunal’s decision was therefore delayed too. The Council will take the agreed action to recognise the injustice caused by the provision that was missed as a result of the delay.

Summary: Mrs X complains about the way the Council considered her requests for school transport for her son, Y. She also complains it has failed to arrange adequate physiotherapy provision or respite care for him, despite this being stipulated in his Education, Health and Care Plan. The Ombudsman has found the Council was at fault for taking too long to consider Mrs X’s request for home-to-school transport. It was also at fault for not considering the part of her complaint about respite care under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. Furthermore, it was at fault for not informing her that it would not amend her son’s plan, following the annual review in October 2018. Consequently, we have made several recommendations to remedy the injustice caused by these faults. The Council has agreed to carry out these recommendations.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to ensure his son had a school place or suitable education, causing distress. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault. We recommend the Council provides an apology, pays £1200 for missed education, pays £200 for distress and takes action to improve its service.