A weekly update on children and education complaint decisions

Please note: our decisions are published six weeks after they are issued to councils, care providers and the person who has made the complaint. The cases below reflect the caselaw and guidance available at the time of issue and the individual circumstances of each case.

Derbyshire County Council (25 005 374)

Summary: We have found fault with the Council for failing to secure a suitable education or Mrs X’s son, Y when he was unable to attend school. This caused him to miss education and the whole family avoidable distress. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice.

Kent County Council (25 007 471)

Summary: Mrs F complained the Council failed to provide education or secure the content of her child’s Education, Health and Care plan when her child stopped attending school. We found fault in the way the Council considered its duties under section 19 of the Education Act 1996 which has caused uncertainty. It also failed to issue a final education, health and care plan on time causing Mrs F’s appeal rights to be delayed. The Council has agreed to make a symbolic payment to Mrs F to remedy this injustice.

Gloucestershire County Council (25 008 700)

Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not conduct his child’s school admissions appeal correctly. We found fault because the appeals panel failed to adequately evidence its considerations of whether the school concerned could admit more children. This caused Mr X avoidable distress. To remedy the injustice caused by this fault, the Council has agreed to apologise and arrange a fresh appeal.

South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (25 011 821)

Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about her children’s education because we cannot investigate complaints about the school, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, and Ms M had a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal to request a different school for her children.

Hertfordshire County Council (25 018 194)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to address her daughter’s educational and social care needs. Part of the complaint is late and there is no good reason to consider it now. Part of it relates to matters which have been subject to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability), or are related to such matters, and cannot therefore be investigated.

Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames (25 018 462)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on what to include in an Education, Health, and Care Plan. Mrs X has already appealed this decision to a Tribunal, and the law does not allow us to investigate.

Leeds City Council (25 018 583)

Summary: We have upheld this complaint about the Council’s failure to complete an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment for Mr X’s child within the statutory timescale. The Council has agreed to provide a proportionate remedy and this removes the need for us to investigate.

Leeds City Council (25 018 899)

Summary: We have upheld this complaint about the Council’s failure to complete an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment for Miss X’s child within the statutory timescale. The Council has agreed to provide a proportionate remedy and this removes the need for us to investigate.

Leeds City Council (25 018 997)

Summary: We have upheld this complaint about the Council’s failure to complete an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment for Ms X’s child within the statutory timescale. The Council has agreed to provide a proportionate remedy and this removes the need for us to investigate.

Suffolk County Council (25 013 213)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the outcome of the Council’s Local Authority Designated Officer safeguarding process. Some of the complaints are late and with the others, there is not enough evidence of fault or significant injustice to warrant an investigation.

Telford & Wrekin Council (25 015 037)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr F’s complaint about contact with his child because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation, and nothing we could add to the Council’s response.

Reading Borough Council (25 016 876)

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about an entry to her home as we cannot investigate the Police’s actions. We will not investigate her complaint about children services’ actions in relation to a child protection conference as we are unlikely to achieve more than the service improvements and apology the Council has already offered.

Cheshire East Council (25 017 509)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about children services’ actions. We have upheld Mr X’s complaint as the Council has now agreed to follow the Children Act statutory complaints’ procedure which is a proportionate way to resolve the complaint.

Leicestershire County Council (25 018 286)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the conduct of a social worker and adoption assessment. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

London Borough of Sutton (25 018 427)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council responding to a child protection referral, or how it carried out its enquiries. There is not enough evidence of fault it started an investigation and the fault Mr X alleges in how it carried out that investigation, has not caused him a significant injustice.

Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council (25 018 718)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of a social worker whom he said asked inappropriate questions and made unfounded allegations against him. The Council upheld the complaint and apologised. An investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to achieve anything else.

Northumberland County Council (25 019 803)

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to complete a children’s statutory complaint investigation in 2019. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to exercise discretion to consider it now. We will not investigate the Council’s refusal to investigate the same complaint in 2025 because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant our involvement.

Birmingham City Council (25 021 093)

Summary: We have upheld Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her complaint about its children’s services. The Council has accepted fault in the way it retained Miss X’s records and now agreed to remedy for avoidable uncertainty this creates. This provides a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Darlington Borough Council (25 022 682)

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council Social Worker or the removal of her grandchildren from her care. This is because the law does not allow us to investigate matters which are subject to court proceedings.

Lancashire County Council (25 025 242)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s concerns about the Councils’ social worker and his complaint about the Council’s complaint handling procedures. There is another agency which can investigate his concerns about the social worker’s conduct. We will not investigate his concerns about the Council’s complaint handling alone if we are not going to investigate any substantives issues.

Milton Keynes Council (24 022 787)

Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to meet its Section 19 duty to ensure her daughter, K, received suitable education when she was unable to attend school due to anxiety. We find that the Council failed to properly consider its duty to provide alternative education for K, which resulted in K not receiving sufficient education. The Council has agreed to make a payment and apologise to Mrs X and K.

Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council (25 004 082)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s son’s educational and special educational needs. This is because the issues she has raised are too closely related to, or a consequence of, decisions on her son’s Education, Health and Care Plan and Mrs X has used her right of appeal to challenge the content of the Plan at both the First-tier and Upper Tribunals.

Plymouth City Council (25 005 115)

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to secure a college placement for her child or provide them with the correct educational support. We found fault by the Council for failing to secure a college placement for Miss X’s child and for not providing them with support which caused them uncertainty and frustration. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to Miss X and her child to recognise the injustice caused to them by its failings. It also agreed to make changes to its service to prevent the same fault from happening again.

Medway Council (25 005 157)

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed her son’s EHC Plan, failed to provide education while he was out of school, and communicated poorly. There is fault in the Council’s actions. This caused significant injustice to Y due to the loss of education and to Mrs X in the form of distress, frustration, and time and trouble. The Council agreed recommended actions to remedy the injustice caused.

Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (25 005 675)

Summary: Ms Z complained on behalf of a child’s parents about the Council’s failure to provide their child, Y, with the provision in his Education, Health and Care Plan and its delays with completing the annual review of Y’s Plan. Ms Z also complained the Council failed to update its records with the correct contact details for Y’s parents. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Y and his parents. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Medway Council (25 005 724)

Summary: Mrs X experienced delayed appeal rights, distress and uncertainty when the Council delayed consulting schools following an annual review, delayed considering putting in place alternative provision and failed to respond to part of a complaint. Mrs X’s son missed out on some education as a result. The Council will apologise, make a payment to Mrs X and provide guidance to officers.

Essex County Council (25 007 284)

Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to give Mrs X the information she needed to make an informed choice about whether to commission a private educational psychologist assessment for her child’s Education, Health and Care Plan assessment. This meant Mrs X paid for the assessment unnecessarily. The Council will reimburse Mrs X the cost of the assessment and take action to prevent similar fault in future.

Oxfordshire County Council (25 007 612)

Summary: Miss X complained that the Council in respect of her son Y had delayed in completing an Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment and issuing a final EHC Plan. It had also failed to consider alternative educational provision for Y and failed to ensure Miss X was reimbursed for alternative education she had funded while Y was unable to attend school. We found fault in the Council’s actions. The Council has agreed to ensure the refund is made to Miss X, apologise to her and Y and make a symbolic payment.

Essex County Council (25 008 822)

Summary: Mrs X says the Council delayed in completing an Education, Health and Care assessment for her child who was out of education. She reports that this issue has affected her child’s mental health and her whole family. We found the Council at fault. There was a ten month delay in the Council completing the assessment. The Council will apologise and make payment to Mrs X to recognise the injustice caused.

Hampshire County Council (25 010 939)

Summary: The Council failed to secure suitable fulltime education under s.19 Education Act 1996 and special educational provision in an Education, Health and Care Plan for a pupil prevented from attending school fulltime due to behaviour reasons. This led to loss of education provision and caused distress and inconvenience to the parent carer. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic financial payment and make service improvements.

Herefordshire Council (25 011 224)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse free school transport for his child. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making.

Suffolk County Council (25 011 776)

Summary: Miss X complained about delays in the Education and Health process for her child. We found the Council failed to complete an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment and issue an Education Health and Care Plan for the complainant’s child within statutory timescales. This caused Miss X avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty. It also meant her child missed six weeks of provision and delayed Miss X’s appeal rights. The Council has already offered Miss X a suitable remedy and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Hertfordshire County Council (25 017 491)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Special Educational Needs provision because Mr Y could have appealed to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal. There is also insufficient evidence of Mr Y suffering significant injustice.

London Borough of Redbridge (25 018 090)

Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about school transport for her son because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Medway Council (25 018 629)

Summary: We have upheld part of this complaint about the Council’s failure to complete an Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment for Ms X’s child within the statutory timescale. The Council has agreed to take appropriate action. It would therefore not be proportionate to investigate. We will not investigate other parts of this complaint about an Education, Health and Care Plan. It would be reasonable for the complainant to take this part of the complaint to the Tribunal.

Kent County Council (25 019 647)

Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about the home to school transport offered by the Council for her daughter because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (25 019 775)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse Mr Y’s blue badge application because we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.

London Borough of Ealing (25 020 659)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay transferring an Education and Health Care Plan. This is because we are unlikely to add anything further to the Council’s response.

Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council (25 021 731)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay processing the transfer of an Education and Health Care Plan. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Surrey County Council (25 023 081)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to change the term dates for the next academic year, and the decision by his children’s school to adopt a two-week half-term break because of the Council’s decision. This is because an investigation by us would not achieve anything worthwhile. We cannot investigate the school’s decision itself because the actions of an academy are outside our jurisdiction.

London Borough of Lambeth (25 017 192)

Summary: We have upheld Ms X’s complaint because the Council has not followed the statutory complaint process correctly. The Council has agreed to reconsider its adjudication.

Northumberland County Council (25 017 917)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Miss X’s information because there is another organisation who are better to look at that. And we will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council contacts her. The Council has made changes to its first decision about this and these changes are appropriate. We would not add anything to them.

Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (25 018 221)

Summary: We will not investigate X’s complaint about children services’ actions. The Information Commissioner’s Office and Social Work England are better placed to do so.

Southampton City Council (25 018 227)

Summary: We cannot investigate the Council’s preparation and content of a Court ordered children services’ report. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about safeguarding matters as it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have told the Court.

Northumberland County Council (25 020 024)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his case when he was a child in its care over 20 years ago. The complaint is historic and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider it now. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to consider his historic complaint via its complaints procedure. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

London Borough of Newham (25 022 046)

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about poor communication from the Council and a delay in responding to her complaint. We are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken, and we consider them to be a reasonable and proportionate remedy.

Cambridgeshire County Council (25 024 053)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a report the Council presented to a court. The law prevents us from investigating matters that have been subject to court proceedings.

London Borough of Croydon (24 006 632)

Summary: We upheld a complaint from Ms X, finding the Council slow to address her dissatisfaction with a personal budget she received to provide occupational therapy for her daughter. Also, it was slow to address how her daughter could attend therapy sessions when her school said it could not transport her. We found as a result Ms X and her daughter suffered an injustice as Ms X did not receive a budget sufficient to meet her daughter’s needs and who lost provision as a result. The Council accepted these findings. At the end of this statement we set out the action it agreed to remedy Ms X’s injustice and improve its service to avoid a repeat.

Bracknell Forest Council (25 003 582)

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to ensure her son (Y) received a suitable and full-time education during a four-month period in 2024. The Council agreed it had been at fault. It apologised and offered a remedy to Ms X to acknowledge the distress she experienced and refunded her tuition costs. We found the Council’s remedy to Ms X was appropriate to remedy the injustice its faults caused.

Cambridgeshire County Council (25 009 324)

Summary: There was no fault in how the Council’s independent panel considered Mrs X’s appeal for free home to school transport for her child Y. The Council was at fault for the delay in completing the appeal process but it provided a free bus pass to Y during this period which was a sufficient remedy for the uncertainty and frustration caused by the delay.

Lincolnshire County Council (25 014 902)

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her child’s education. Some of the complaint is late and it was reasonable for Miss X to use her right of appeal. The rest of the complaint is outside our jurisdiction because Miss X appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability).

Cambridgeshire County Council (25 016 770)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education, Health and Care plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay.

Cambridgeshire County Council (25 017 794)

Wokingham Borough Council (25 018 774)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his request it educate his child out of year group. The complaint is late and it was reasonable for Mr X to complain sooner. Also, the Council agreed to Mr X’s request so there is no worthwhile outcome from us investigating.

Buckinghamshire Council (25 018 823)

Buckinghamshire Council (25 018 926)

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (25 020 147)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr F’s complaint about post-16 college transport for his daughter because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Lancashire County Council (25 026 952)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a school’s decision to permanently exclude Miss Y’s child because we cannot investigate complaints about what happens in schools. We are also unlikely to find fault in the Independent Review Panel’s response to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council (25 017 718)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of care arrangements for a child. The decision about care of the child was made by a court and the law prevents us from investigating matters relating to it.

Leeds City Council (25 017 769)

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council refused to consider her complaint under the statutory children’s complaints procedure. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

London Borough of Bexley (25 018 199)

Summary: We cannot investigate a school or the police’s investigation into a safeguarding incident. We will not investigate the Council’s consideration of the incident as it is unlikely we would find the faults he alleges would have changed the Council’s consideration outcome. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council had failed to provide a suitable education as it is unlikely we would find fault.

Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (25 020 555)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a social media post and the Council’s decision to refuse to investigate his complaint under the complaint procedure. We have not seen enough evidence of fault with the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

London Borough of Lambeth (25 004 408)

Summary: The Council carried out the Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment without fault. The Council was at fault for failing to consider its section 19 duty after Mr X told the Council his child (Y) was not attending school. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to remedy the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused.

Telford & Wrekin Council (25 005 574)

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has not dealt properly with her daughter Y’s education causing avoidable distress and missed provision. The Council did not ensure special educational provision was made. Y suffered loss of some special educational provision. The Council should apologise and pay Mrs X a symbolic payment.

West Sussex County Council (25 006 536)

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed issuing her daughter, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. She also complained the Council failed to pay for provision, and communication and complaint handling was poor. Mrs X said this frustrated and distressed her. There was fault in the way the Council delayed repaying Mrs X for tuition, delayed issuing the EHC Plan and complaint handling was poor. This distressed and frustrated Mrs X and frustrated her right of appeal to the Tribunal. The Council agreed to apologise and make a financial payment.

Devon County Council (25 007 731)

Summary: We found fault with the Council delaying for eight months outside the statutory timescales producing Mr X’s child’s Education, Health and Care Plan. This caused Mr X avoidable distress and frustrated his appeal rights. We also found fault with the Council failing to ensure Mr X’s child had access to suitable education from January 2025 to December 2025. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him a symbolic financial remedy for the distress, frustrated appeal rights and for his child’s missed education.

North Yorkshire Council (25 008 861)

Summary: There was no fault in the way the Council considered Mrs X’s application for home to school transport.

Liverpool City Council (25 009 969)

Summary: The Council failed to secure all the provision in an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan and while it offered a financial remedy at local resolution, this did not fully reflect the amount of provision missed. The Council has agreed to increase the remedy and make service improvements.

North Yorkshire Council (25 013 263)

Summary: There was some fault in the way the Council publicised its new home to school transport policy and the way in which this was considered by its Transport Appeal Committee at Mrs X’s appeal. However, this did not cause Mrs X a significant injustice as she was aware of the Council’s new policy and that the school applied for was not the nearest school for school transport purposes. The Council has agreed to take action to improve its communication of the new policy to prevent others being affected by the same fault.

Hampshire County Council (25 018 663)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council charging contributions for a discretionary school transport agreement. This is because there is not evidence of injustice to warrant our involvement.

Devon County Council (25 024 626)

Summary: We found fault with the Council delaying by ten weeks outside the statutory timescales in reviewing Mr X’s child’s Education, Health and Care Plan. We did not find this caused a significant personal injustice to Mr X or his child. We did not find fault with the educational provision put in place by the Council.

Derbyshire County Council (25 019 065)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s children’s services involvement with Miss X’s family. The law does not allow us to investigate matters which have been subject to court proceedings. In any case, Miss X’s complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to exercise discretion to consider any parts of the complaint that could be separable from court proceedings.

Darlington Borough Council (25 019 733)

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about evidence the Council provided to the court in proceedings relating to her children. The law prevents us from investigating complaints about matters that have been considered in court proceedings. We have no discretion to do so.

West Sussex County Council (25 019 778)

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of safeguarding concerns about her daughter. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider her complaint via its complaints procedure whilst there are ongoing family court proceedings.

Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (25 019 782)

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the social worker allocated to her grandchildren’s case which is subject to ongoing care proceedings. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider the complaint whilst there are ongoing court proceedings.

London Borough of Tower Hamlets (25 020 627)

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about historical safeguarding failures by the Council. Her complaint is late, and an investigation by us would not achieve anything worthwhile.

London Borough of Redbridge (25 010 398)

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to properly consider a blue badge application for his child, Y. Mr X says this has caused him and his family distress. We have found fault in the Councils actions for failing to consider all information available to it. The Council has agreed to write to Mr X to apologise and pay him a financial payment alongside the action the Council has already taken.

Staffordshire County Council (25 018 136)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council gave legal advice to the mother of his child to encourage her to breach a court order. This is because we have not seen enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Suffolk County Council (25 013 241)

Summary: We cannot investigate part of this complaint about the Council’s decision on the school it named in an Education, Health, and Care Plan. Miss X had a right of appeal on that decision, and it would have been reasonable to expect her to use it. Nor will we investigate the length of time it took, for the Council to complete the plan, after an annual review. The Council has already remedied Miss X’s injustice here and there are no wider public interest issues to justify investigating.

London Borough of Barnet (25 018 218)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s provision of support in the complainant’s children’s Education Health and Care plans. This is because the complainant has used her right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) and the Courts have decided the Ombudsman cannot intervene where the right to appeal has been used.

Rutland County Council (25 019 118)

Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about the consultation undertaken by the Council before the introduction of changes to its post-16 school transport policy because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating, and nothing we could add to the Council’s response.

Manchester City Council (25 020 695)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a school’s decision to permanently exclude Miss Y’s child because we cannot investigate complaints about what happens in schools or the actions of Independent Review Panels for academy schools.

Liverpool City Council (25 020 796)

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss Y’s complaint about the advice sought by the Council during her child’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment. Miss Y has appealed to a tribunal about the content of the EHC Plan, so we have no power to investigate her complaint.

Cheshire East Council (25 007 604)

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her child’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment and the alternative provision arranged while her child was out of education. We have not investigated her complaint about the content of the EHC Plan because she has a right of appeal to the Tribunal. We do not find fault in the alternative provision arranged by the Council, but we do find fault in its failure to inform Ms X of her right to request a personal budget which resulted in a lost opportunity for Ms X to consider whether to make such a request. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X.

North Yorkshire Council (25 009 524)

Summary: There was some fault in the way the Council publicised its new home to school transport policy. However, this did not cause Mr X a significant injustice as this would not have affected Mr X’s decision regarding the school applied for their child to attend. There was no evidence of fault in the way the appeals committee considered Mr X’s appeal against the Council’s decision not to provide free transport.

Plymouth City Council (25 010 990)

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s delays with the Education, Health and Care needs assessment process for his child. We found fault with the Council as it did not meet statutory timescales. This caused frustration and uncertainty for Mr X, and his child missed out on extra support for their needs. The Council agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice caused.

Cambridgeshire County Council (25 010 095)

Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about the Council’s children’s services’ involvement in Mr X’s child’s case over several years. Some parts of the complaint are about historical matters that we could not now reach sound conclusions on. Mr X could have brought all parts of the complaint to us sooner.

Swindon Borough Council (25 017 341)

Summary: We will not investigate part of Mr X and Mrs Y’s complaint about an overpayment for fostering allowance because the Council apologised and cancelled its request for repayment. An investigation is unlikely to achieve any additional outcome. We cannot investigate part of the complaint about the Council’s response to their Subject Access Request because Mr X and Mrs Y have taken the matter to court, and the law says we cannot investigate. We will not investigate the Council’s complaint handling because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met.

Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (25 017 681)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s response to safeguarding concerns he raised because there is insufficient evidence of fault and he has not suffered a personal injustice.

Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (25 018 182)

Summary: We will not investigate part of Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of a social worker because Social Work England is better placed to consider a social worker’s professional conduct and because we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants. We will not investigate the remainder of Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with his family because the issues will likely be considered by a court.

Bracknell Forest Council (25 029 381)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s recording, handling and use of information concerning Mrs X. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider it now. In addition, there is another body better placed to consider the outcome Mrs X seeks.

Surrey County Council (25 018 167)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council holding an education review too early. It would be reasonable for Miss X to use her right to appeal at tribunal if she is unhappy with the result.

North Yorkshire Council (25 006 247)

Summary: We found fault on Mrs Y’s complaint about the Council failing to provide her son, who was not attending school, with suitable education, as well as with provision set out in his Education, Health and Care plan. The Council agreed to send an apology, make a symbolic payment for the injustice caused, as well as taking action to ensure the failures found cannot be repeated in the future.

London Borough of Sutton (25 020 030)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing free school transport for the complainant’s child. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.


This email was sent to ooseims.archieves@blogger.com using GovDelivery Communications Cloud on behalf of: The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman ·5 Quinton Road, Coventry, CV1 2WT

Food Blog

Thursday, June 4, 2026

Home decor and design photo | Home Decor and Design pics

Home decor and design photo | Home Decor and Design pics

This and That

"That tasted AMAZING" they said

Favorite Summer Dishes

Strawberry Cheesecake Bars

If you're a fan of cheesecake, you're going to love these simple Strawberry Cheesecake Bars! Made with a graham cracker crust, cream cheese filling and topped with a simple strawberry compote, they're like classic cheesecake but even easier to whip up.

TRY THIS RECIPE

Corn Pasta

Creamy Corn Pasta is a simple summer comfort food that tosses pasta and fresh corn in a rich parmesan cream sauce. It’s vegetarian-friendly and easy to make in 20 minutes!

TRY THIS RECIPE

Grilled Mango Chicken

Grilled Mango Chicken is a refreshing and smoky summer meal with a tropical twist! Easy to make with a mango-soy sauce marinade and boneless chicken thighs, this is the one you need on your summer grilling list.

TRY THIS RECIPE

Crispy Cod Sandwich

This crispy Cod Sandwich will be your new go-to cod! It’s made with a mixture of flour and breadcrumbs, can be fried or baked and is topped with spicy yogurt sauce and a simple coleslaw.

TRY THIS RECIPE

Cherry Chocolate Chip Cookies

Cherry season calls for a batch of these Cherry Chocolate Chip Cookies. Similar to traditional chocolate chip cookies but with the addition of fresh cherries or maraschino cherries, this is a tasty way to jazz up cookies.

TRY THIS RECIPE

Peanut Butter Cottage Cheese Pie

This no-bake Peanut Butter Cottage Cheese Pie is the ultimate summer treat! A creamy peanut butter and cottage cheese filling is layered over a pretzel crust to give you the most decadent salty, sweet, and creamy bites.

TRY THIS RECIPE

Corn Dip

Get the party started with this creamy and tangy Corn Dip! It’s a 15-minute that transforms simple ingredients, like grilled corn, Greek yogurt, sautéed onions, and cotija cheese, into an irresistible party snack.

TRY THIS RECIPE

Tomato Risotto

This easy Tomato Risotto takes risotto to the next level. Made with fresh tomatoes, parmesan cheese and fresh basil, it's flavorful, has the perfect creamy consistency and can be made on the stovetop or in the Instant Pot!

TRY THIS RECIPE

New children and education complaint decisions

A weekly update on children and education complaint decisions

Thursday, June 4, 2026

Home decor and design photo | Home Decor and Design pics

Home decor and design photo | Home Decor and Design pics

This and That

"That tasted AMAZING" they said

Favorite Summer Dishes

​Strawberry Cheesecake Bars​

If you're a fan of cheesecake, you're going to love these simple Strawberry Cheesecake Bars! Made with a graham cracker crust, cream cheese filling and topped with a simple strawberry compote, they're like classic cheesecake but even easier to whip up.

​TRY THIS RECIPE​

​Corn Pasta​

Creamy Corn Pasta is a simple summer comfort food that tosses pasta and fresh corn in a rich parmesan cream sauce. It’s vegetarian-friendly and easy to make in 20 minutes!

​TRY THIS RECIPE​

​Grilled Mango Chicken​

Grilled Mango Chicken is a refreshing and smoky summer meal with a tropical twist! Easy to make with a mango-soy sauce marinade and boneless chicken thighs, this is the one you need on your summer grilling list.

​TRY THIS RECIPE​

​Crispy Cod Sandwich​

This crispy Cod Sandwich will be your new go-to cod! It’s made with a mixture of flour and breadcrumbs, can be fried or baked and is topped with spicy yogurt sauce and a simple coleslaw.

​TRY THIS RECIPE​

​Cherry Chocolate Chip Cookies​

Cherry season calls for a batch of these Cherry Chocolate Chip Cookies. Similar to traditional chocolate chip cookies but with the addition of fresh cherries or maraschino cherries, this is a tasty way to jazz up cookies.

​TRY THIS RECIPE​

​Peanut Butter Cottage Cheese Pie​

This no-bake Peanut Butter Cottage Cheese Pie is the ultimate summer treat! A creamy peanut butter and cottage cheese filling is layered over a pretzel crust to give you the most decadent salty, sweet, and creamy bites.

​TRY THIS RECIPE​

​Corn Dip​

Get the party started with this creamy and tangy Corn Dip! It’s a 15-minute that transforms simple ingredients, like grilled corn, Greek yogurt, sautéed onions, and cotija cheese, into an irresistible party snack.

​TRY THIS RECIPE​

​Tomato Risotto​

This easy Tomato Risotto takes risotto to the next level. Made with fresh tomatoes, parmesan cheese and fresh basil, it's flavorful, has the perfect creamy consistency and can be made on the stovetop or in the Instant Pot!

​TRY THIS RECIPE​

New children and education complaint decisions

A weekly update on children and education complaint decisions

Strawberry Cheesecake Bars

TRY THIS RECIPE

Corn Pasta

TRY THIS RECIPE

Grilled Mango Chicken

TRY THIS RECIPE

Crispy Cod Sandwich

TRY THIS RECIPE

Cherry Chocolate Chip Cookies

TRY THIS RECIPE

Peanut Butter Cottage Cheese Pie

TRY THIS RECIPE

Corn Dip

TRY THIS RECIPE

Tomato Risotto

TRY THIS RECIPE