New children and education complaint decisions

View online 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. London Borough of Hackney (18 007 219) Summary: Miss X complained about failings by the Council in the transition from a Statement of Special Educational Needs to an Education Health and Care plan, and its failure to ensure speech and language support was delivered in 2017. The Council failed to send the final plan to all relevant parties in August 2016, which delayed Miss X getting appeal rights. It also failed to provide speech and language support set out in her Statement from May to July 2017. It will apologise and make a payment for the uncertainty caused by the lack of provision. Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (19 019 839) Summary: the complainant says the Council delayed its assessment of her son's special educational needs and suitable provision causing disruption and distress to the family. The Council recognised the faults and impact they had and offered a remedy. We upheld the complaint and recommended a greater remedy of £2,700. Birmingham City Council (20 002 072) Summary: Ms X complained the Council did not provide any alternative educational provision for her son while he was out of school between April 2019 and November 2020. Ms X also complained the Council delayed in identifying an appropriate school for her son and failed to comply with the statutory timeframes for completing his EHC Plan. The Council's failure to provide Y with alternative educational provision between April 2019 and November 2020 amounts to fault. As does the delay in issuing a final EHC plan. These faults have caused Ms X and Y an injustice. Cheshire East Council (20 002 507) Summary: the Council delayed completing the assessment of X's special educational needs and issuing a final Education, Health and Care Plan. This caused her injustice as it delayed her receiving the additional support she needed by four months. The Council will apologise and make a payment to recognise the injustice caused. It has already altered its processes to ensure that the faults identified do not happen in future. Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council (20 004 554) Summary: Miss X complains about the Council's response to her complaints about a third party. The Ombudsman will not investigate as we have not seen evidence of fault in the Council's actions. London Borough Of Barnet (19 011 750) Summary: Miss W complains the Council failed to make appropriate full-time education provision for her son, V. It also placed him in unsuitable education, failed to keep his Education, Health and Care Plan properly updated, failed to respond to her complaints and referred the matter to child protection even though she says the main issue was him being out of school. She says this caused her, and her family, distress and time and trouble and V was deprived of services he should have received. There is evidence of fault and the Council has agreed to apologise, make appropriate payments and to change its procedures around complaint handling. Suffolk County Council (20 000 639) Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council's actions leading up to the provision of an Education, Health and Care plan for her child. She says the Council incurred delays and provided misleading information about the process. Mrs X also complains about the Council's handling of her complaint. She says the Council's actions caused unnecessary stress and uncertainty to her child and the wider family. We find fault by the Council in this matter and the Council has agreed a remedy to address the injustice caused. London Borough of Tower Hamlets (19 020 898) Summary: Mr X complains about the Council's decision to put his son on a child protection plan and about its failure to follow correct appeal processes. The Council is not at fault. Hertfordshire County Council (20 010 308) Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B's complaint that the Council provided false and misleading information to the Family Court. This is because the complaint concerns evidence provided to a court. Leicestershire County Council (19 017 864) Summary: There is evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with matters relating to Ms C' son's Special Educational Needs (SEN). The Council has agreed to implement actions in order to remedy the injustice these faults caused. Sheffield City Council (20 002 945) Summary: Mr B complained the Council did not carry out his son's school admissions appeal correctly. Mr B complained the Council did not give his son a place at the same school as his sibling and this caused the family distress and inconvenience. The Council delayed sending notice of the hearing but there was no fault with the hearing itself. The Council's fault did not cause Mr B significant injustice. Sheffield City Council (20 010 034) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about special educational needs provision for her adult son, Mr Y. The last correspondence with the Council was more than 12 months ago and there is no good reason to investigate the matters complained of now. Kent County Council (19 011 105) Summary: Mr X says the Council did not properly investigate his reports of domestic abuse/neglect involving the mother of his children. He also says the officers who handled the matter and his subsequent complaint were racially biased against him. There was fault in the Council's investigation of Mr X's complaint of racial bias. The Council agreed a financial remedy to address the injustice suffered by Mr X. Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council (19 018 842) Summary: the complainant complained the Council failed to properly investigate a safeguarding referral resulting in him spending time away from his family damaging family relationships. The Council accepts it acted with fault and offered an apology and payment of £250. We found the Council acted with fault and recommended an increased remedy of £750. London Borough of Harrow (19 017 779) Summary: The complainant alleged that the Council delayed in making the required special educational needs provision for his adult daughter, after a Tribunal decision, and the Council failed to consider its Equality Act duties when considering the complainant's appeal against the refusal of free transport to College for his daughter. The Ombudsman found fault in the Council's actions. The Council has agreed the recommended actions to remedy the injustice caused by the Council's faults. We are therefore closing the complaint. London Borough of Islington (20 009 872) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's delays in assessing and issuing a final Education, Health and Care Plan. This is because the complaint it is late with no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now. Durham County Council (20 010 200) Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about a potential data breach. This is because the Information Commissioner's Office has already investigated the data breach and it is not a good use of public money to investigate complaints about complaint handling. Buckinghamshire Council (20 004 920) Summary: The Council upheld some of Mr B's complaint that it failed to provide reports before conferences. It also failed to address the concerns Mr B raised about inaccuracies in some reports and minutes. This caused Mr B avoidable distress. The Council agrees actions to remedy the injustice caused to Mr B. Cheshire West & Chester Council (20 011 529) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council's child protection team's involvement in his family. There are no good reasons why the late complaint rule should not apply. Suffolk County Council (20 003 724) Summary: the complainant complained the Council wrongly refused her application for home to school transport and refused to exercise discretion to allow her to appeal. The Council says it applied its home to school transport policy properly and did not offer an appeal because the appeal arrived after its deadline. We find the Council acted with fault and recommend a remedy. St. Georges Primary School (20 005 524) Summary: The Ombudsman found fault by the school in the way it dealt with Mrs M's request for an in-year place for her daughter. It failed to explain the process, offer her an application form, explain her appeal rights, and delayed forwarding her appeal form. The evidence failed to show the appeal panel properly considered the appeal or followed the correct procedure. The agreed action remedies the injustice these failures caused. London Borough of Hackney (19 012 615) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council harassing him and his daughter since 2019. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. London Borough of Lambeth (19 015 006) Summary: Mr X complains the Council's offer of a remedy payment on the conclusion of court proceedings does not reflect the costs he incurred or reflect the agreed outcome of an independent investigation into his complaints. We have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered these matters so have completed our investigation. Durham County Council (20 009 205) Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X's complaint about who cares for her children as a Court decided that. We should not investigate her complaint about data sharing as the Information Commissioner's Office is better placed. Durham County Council (20 009 619) Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X's complaint about the Council's views on Ms X's children's care or the information the Council gave a Court. We cannot investigate the conduct of legal proceedings and the Court is currently considering the children's care. Middlesbrough Borough Council (20 009 760) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about data sharing. The Information Commissioner's Office is better placed. Lancashire County Council (20 009 936) Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B's complaint that the Council has been at fault in its involvement with his family, resulting in his children being placed in foster care. This is because the actions about which he has complained are not separable from matters which have been considered and decided in court. Derbyshire County Council (20 002 225) Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to carry out his daughter, Miss D's, annual review after a Tribunal hearing. The Council was at fault for not holding Miss D's annual review within the statutory timescales but this did not cause her a significant injustice. Hampshire County Council (20 002 251) Summary: Mrs X complains the Council delayed carrying out an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Needs Assessment and finalising the related EHC Plan for her son, B. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault. The delays meant B missed out on certain educational provision. Mrs X incurred costs connected with the time and trouble she was put to chasing the Council. To remedy the injustice caused to Mrs X and B, the Council has agreed to apologise to them, and make a payment to reflect the injustice caused to Mrs X and B by the fault. We look at individual complaints about local public services and all registerable social care providers in England. We remedy injustice and share learning from investigations to improve services. When we find a council or care provider has done something wrong, we recommend how it should put it right. We are free to use and make our decisions independently. Find out more about us at www.lgo.org.uk Manage preferences or unsubscribe Contact us

This email was sent to ooseims.archieves@blogger.com using GovDelivery Communications Cloud on behalf of: The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman · 53-55 Butts Road · Coventry · CV1 3BH