Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s children’s services. This is because nearly all the complaint concern matters that have either been considered in court or are too closely linked to the court proceedings. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision not to investigate a complaint about these matters or in how it considered the complainants requests for reasonable adjustments.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not providing a translator in a matter concerning Mr X’s infant grandchild coming to live with him and his wife.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the refusal of a blue badge for Mr X’s child. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the complainant’s children’s social worker. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

Summary: We investigated if there were systemic faults in the Council’s administration of annual reviews for pupils with Education, Health and Care plans. We upheld the complaint, finding evidence of repeated delays in the Council telling parents of the outcome of annual reviews and in issuing amended and finalised plans. The Council satisfied us it had taken some steps to address these faults. At the end of this statement, we set out further action the Council has agreed to improve its service in this area.

Summary: Miss B complained that the Council failed to ensure that all the provision in her son C’s Education, Health and Care plan was in place promptly and in accordance with the plan. This caused her and her son distress and frustration. We found the Council delayed in meeting all the provision: including ensuring a personal laptop was provided and that motor skills and other support sessions took place. The Council has agreed to pay Miss B £300 for the benefit of C’s education and £200 for her own injustice.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council caused delays during the Education, Health and Care needs assessment for her son. We found the Council delayed the assessment. The Council will apologise and make a payment to recognise the injustice caused by the delay.

Summary: Ms X complained about the consideration of her appeals for a place for her daughter at their preferred schools. She considered she did not have a fair hearing and that as a result her daughter was not awarded a place at either of her preferred schools. There was fault by the Council but it did not cause injustice.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council wrongly refused to pay for an occupational therapy assessment as part of her son’s Education, Health and Care needs assessment (EHC needs assessment). Ms X said as a result she had to pay for this herself. We have discontinued this investigation, as the Council and another body involved have now reimbursed Ms X in full for the two occupational therapy assessments she commissioned. There is no longer sufficient injustice to Ms X that would justify the Ombudsman’s involvement and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council carried out an Education Health and Care needs assessment. This is because the complainant used their right of appeal to a tribunal against the Council’s original decision not to carry out an assessment. Any injustice caused by the Council’s delay in issuing a final plan is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to dismiss a home to school transport appeal as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint the Council named a mainstream school placement in an Education, Health and Care plan. The complainant appealed to the Tribunal. Therefore, the law says we cannot investigate.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council wrongly refused a Blue Badge renewal application for her son, Y who has autism. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council considered the application and used its professional judgement to decide Y was not eligible for a blue badge under the hidden disability criteria.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed carrying out a child and family social care assessment of her disabled son and has failed to put social care provision in place since September 2022. We found the Council had failed to investigate Ms X’s complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. It has agreed to investigate the complaint under stage 2 of the statutory procedure without delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s children’s services officers in their engagement with the complainant’s family because investigation would not achieve anything significant.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider his complaint until the ongoing court proceedings have concluded.

Summary: Mrs U complains the Council delayed issuing an EHC plan for her daughter. She says this has led to unnecessary time, trouble and distress. And her daughter has missed SEN provision. Mrs U also complains the Council’s communication with her was inadequate. The Ombudsman upholds the complaint. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.

Summary: The Council was at fault for failing properly to consider Mrs X’s request for free school transport for her child. The Council has agreed to apologise, provide free transport, and repay Mrs X the costs of transport since she applied. The Council has also agreed to our recommended service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council reviewed an Education Health and Care plan. This is because the Council upheld the complaint and took appropriate steps to address the issues raised. Further investigation would therefore not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a home to school transport application. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: The Council was at fault for refusing to investigate a complaint about its children’s services because of the passage of time. This denied the complainant their right to access the statutory complaint procedure and put them to unnecessary time and trouble. The Council accepts these findings. At the end of this statement, we set out action it has agreed to take to remedy this injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s complaints process as further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed considering a complaint at stage two of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint by issuing a stage two response and offering to make a payment to them to remedy the time and trouble the complainant has been too.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s children’s services department or its handling of Mr X’s complaint. Mr X’s complaint is late and there is no good reason to investigate it now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement in Miss X’s children’s case. The matter is currently subject to court proceedings, however there may be matters that can be separated after those proceedings have finished.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to ensure her daughter, C, received some of the provision set out in her Education, Health, and Care Plan. Miss X also said the Council failed to adhere to statutory time-limits when completing C’s annual review and failed to properly handle her complaint. The Council was at fault for failing to provide some of C’s provision and for failing to adhere to the statutory time limits. It was also at fault for failing to adhere to its complaints procedure and for failing to explain Miss X’s right to challenge its decision on personal budgets. This caused Miss X uncertainty, frustration, and put her to the time and trouble of complaining. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused to Miss X.

Summary: Ms B complained that the Council failed to provide her daughter C with a full-time education in accordance with her EHCP since September 2022. We found that the action the Council took in November 2022 adequately resolved the missed education up to 31 October 2022 but we found the Council failed to provide education to C for approximately two months between February and April 2023. The Council has agreed to pay £400 to Ms B for the benefit of C’s education.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to refuse her child a place at her preferred school. She said the appeal panel failed to consider her child’s personal circumstances. She also said the school place the Council allocated for her child is too far to travel. We discontinued our investigation. That is because the Council offered Mrs X a new appeal. That is in line with the remedy the Ombudsman may have recommended. Further investigation was unlikely to lead to a different outcome and there was no other worthwhile outcome achievable by continuing the investigation.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed carrying out an Education Health and Care needs assessment. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint by offering to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the injustice this caused. We will not investigate the school named by the Council because it would be reasonable for the complainant to use their right of appeal to a tribunal about this matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education Health and Care Plan process. Some of the complaint is late and Mr X appealed to a tribunal. This places most of the complaint outside our jurisdiction. There is not enough fault or injustice from the remainder of the complaint to warrant our involvement.

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council safeguarded his great-grandchild and about its role in their care. He also complained about how the Council responded to his children’s statutory complaint. The Council was at fault for delay at stage two and three of the statutory complaint procedure. The delay caused Mr X avoidable frustration, for which the Council will pay £250. It will also complete stage three of the procedure.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council has not dealt with child protection concerns properly. The Council is not at fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council providing Mr X with incorrect information about child benefits. This is because Mr X has used his right to appeal to the Social Security and Child Support Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement with Mr X when he was fostering his relatives. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to result in a worthwhile outcome.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council has not dealt properly with her son Y’s education. The Council did not properly consider whether it needed to provide alternative education for Y. Miss X and Y suffered avoidable distress and uncertainty, were subject to unnecessary child protection proceedings and Y lost educational provision. The Council should apologise to Miss X and Y, pay Miss X £9,600 in respect of Y’s lost educational provision, pay Miss X £1,100 for avoidable distress and provide training to staff.

Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council provided for her son, Y’s, special educational needs. There were delays in reviewing Y’s Education Health and Care plan and authorising payments for the support the Council agreed to provide. The Council also communicated poorly with Miss X. The Council agreed to apologise, pay a financial remedy and confirm the ongoing personal budget. It also agreed to review how it communicates between its teams and how it authorises personal budgets.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council delayed in completing her son’s Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment and issuing a final Education Health Care Plan for him. We found fault by the Council but consider the agreed action provides a suitable remedy.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to secure all the special educational provision in her daughter, Miss Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan. The Council was at fault. It was also at fault for delay in reviewing Miss Y’s EHC plan and for a poor complaint response. The Council will apologise, pay Miss X a total of £3200 and remind staff of the correct procedure.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to provide Z with a suitable education while he was out of school, failed to complete the annual review of Z’s Education Health and Care plan within the statutory timescales and to communicate properly with him about Z’s education. We have found fault by the Council causing injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy this by apologising to Mr X and Z, making payments to recognise the impact on Z of the missed education and to reflect Mr X’s distress and worry, reporting to us on the current position regarding Z’s education and making service improvements.

Summary: There was fault because the Council did not stick to a commitment in how it would send Mrs X electronic messages. That fault caused Mrs X an injustice and the Council have already apologised and taken steps to minimise these incidences before our involvement. It has also offered to meet with Mrs X to propose a longer-term solution. I find these remedies are sufficient to address Mrs X’s injustice.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed in completing an Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment for her daughter. Mrs X says she suffered distress and uncertainty as a result and has been put to avoidable time and trouble in pursuing this matter. We found fault by the Council and consider the agreed action provides a suitable remedy.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed completing her daughter, K’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan. The Council was at fault for delay caused by a national shortage of Educational Psychologists. This means the Council has not yet issued K’s final EHC plan. The Council will apologise and pay Mrs X £500 to recognise the frustration and uncertainty the delays had on her. It will make an ongoing payment of £100 per month until it issues K’s final EHC plan.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed completing her daughter, F’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment in line with statutory timescales. The Council failed to decide whether to issue F with an EHC plan within the statutory timescales, caused by a delay in obtaining Educational Psychologist advice. This has caused a further delay in the Council issuing F’s final EHC plan. The Council agreed to make a payment to Mrs X to acknowledge the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused to her and F as a result of the delays. It will make a further payment to acknowledge the continuing injustice once it issues F’s final EHC plan.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide free transport to school for her son. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.