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. Essex County Council (21 009 402) Summary: Mr Y complains about the Council's refusal to provide transport assistance for his daughter, W, to attend her nearest available secondary school. We find the Council at fault for not properly considering W's case. In particular, that there was no closer school she could attend due to her status as a late applicant and furthermore for not properly exploring the circumstances around the family's reasons for applying late. The Council will apologise, re-take its decision and amend its Education Transport policy. Peterborough City Council (21 018 516) Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X's complaint about the support and hours a child received while at a nursery. I Q R A Slough Islamic Primary School (22 004 148) 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 and so we cannot question the merits of the panel's decision. Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (22 004 215) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's response to Ms X's request for an assessment of her child's special educational needs. Investigation would be unlikely to lead to the outcome Ms X is seeking. Ms X had a right of appeal against the Council's decision it would have been reasonable to use, and any delay by the Council in issuing its decision would have been too short to cause significant injustice even if Ms X had exercised her right of appeal. Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (21 010 465) Summary: Mr Y complains about the Council's delay in providing the support his family needed when the Council received a referral about his daughter's emotional wellbeing and self-harming behaviours. The Council apologised and accepted it could have acted sooner to provide support for the family. In addition to the apology and service improvements already proposed, the Council will pay £300 to Mr Y in recognition of the distress caused by fault. Holy Family RC & C Of E School (22 003 317) Summary: We will not investigate Miss X's complaint about the Schools Admissions Appeal Panel's failure to provide her child with a place. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault which caused her to lose out on a school place. Somerset County Council (22 004 247) Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about direct payments. This is because Ms Y is not complaining as a member of the public. Bedford Borough Council (22 004 355) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's failure to gather satisfactory advice from a speech and language therapist. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. Surrey County Council (22 004 376) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mrs X's son not being in full time education and not receiving the special educational needs provisions set out in his Education, Health, and Care plan. This is because the complaint is outside of the Ombudsman's jurisdiction and because there is nothing an investigation could achieve at present. St Paul's School for Girls, Edgbaston (22 004 548) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault. Milton Keynes Council (21 004 690) Summary: Mr B, the manager of a fostering agency, complained about the Council's decision to refuse his request for an uplifted fee for an enhanced foster care placement. We found the Council was at fault in failing to use the correct contract framework and consider all the evidence when reaching a decision on the request. It also delayed in responding to Mr B's request in writing and in responding to his complaint. In recognition of the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to the agency. Cambridgeshire County Council (22 002 842) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about fostering. This is because the complaint is late with no good reasons to investigate it now. Plymouth City Council (22 003 234) Summary: Mr X complains about how the Council conducted a social work assessment and managed a child protection plan in respect of his children. We have discontinued our investigation. The Council has already accepted that it was wrong, and has offered Mr X a remedy in line with the Ombudsman's guidance. Leicestershire County Council (21 007 287) Summary: there is no evidence of fault that has caused Ms C injustice as a result of Leicestershire County Council's consideration of the matters she raised in her complaint in 2021 Darlington Borough Council (21 012 019) Summary: Miss X complains about how the Council dealt with her appeal for home to school transport for her son. There was fault by the Council as the appeal panel did not consider the Council's discretion. We also find fault in the Council's policies on home to school transport. The Council has agreed to review the appeal panel's decision and its policies. Herefordshire Council (21 015 474) Summary: Ms X complained about the outcome of a home to school transport appeal for her son. She said the panel did not properly all the information she provided or give clear reasons for its decision. There was fault in the Council's record keeping but this did not cause Ms X a significant injustice as it did not affect the outcome of the appeal. Service improvement is recommended. Cornwall Council (22 004 291) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council delayed assessing a child's Special Educational Needs, meaning they were in an unsuitable school for eighteen months. This is because the Council's decisions carried a right of appeal to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal. There is either insufficient evidence of either fault or significant injustice with other matters raised. Swindon Borough Council (22 004 691) Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X's complaint about the content of lessons in her child's school. This is because the law prevents us from investigating complaints about what happens in schools. Nottinghamshire County Council (22 004 713) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about his application for a school place. This is because it is reasonable for Mr X to use the appeal rights available to him. Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (21 011 663) Summary: the Council's policy of capping adoption allowance at two thirds of core fostering allowance does not appear to reflect statutory guidance. The Council has followed this policy for at least ten years and was unable to explain now why it decided not follow the guidance. This is fault. However, the Council has decided to review the policy. East Sussex County Council (21 012 426) Summary: The Council was not at fault for how it assessed Mrs X as a potential adopter for a child. However, it was at fault for failing to adequately manage Mrs X's expectations throughout the process. As a result, Mrs X believed she would be able to adopt the child. The Council agreed to apologise, make a payment for the distress caused and take steps to improve its procedures for the future. Norfolk County Council (21 013 105) Summary: the Council accepted the findings and recommendations of an independent complaint investigation and agreed to revisit evidence collected during a child protection investigation. Mr F has since obtained further evidence himself which the Council has agreed to consider. Mr F has asked the Council to correct the information it holds and made a further complaint about delays in the process. He has also asked for compensation. The Council is still considering his complaints, so it is not appropriate for the Ombudsman to investigate now. Buckinghamshire Council (22 001 276) Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X's complaint about the Council's actions in relation to her and a child she looked after from late 2020 to early 2021. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is about a matter that has been subject to court proceedings. We will not consider Ms X's complaint about a lack of support from the Council when she was looking after the child. This part of the complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late. Somerset County Council (22 002 455) Summary: We have discontinued our investigation into Mrs B's complaint about the Council's complaint-handling. We could not add to what the Council has already said, and Mrs B did not suffer an injustice significant enough to justify our involvement. Brighton & Hove City Council (22 004 378) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's actions in respect of Mr X's family. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation, and we cannot achieve the outcome he wants. Wiltshire Council (22 004 639) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about child protection action in respect of the complainant's granddaughter. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council's part. Snodland CofE Primary School (22 003 898) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful school admission appeal. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The School has now offered the complainant's child a place and so there is nothing further we could achieve. Norfolk County Council (22 004 369) Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about child protection action and the welfare of children in care. This is because the complaint concerns matters which have been decided in court. St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (21 015 216) Summary: Mrs C complained the Council caused delays when it reviewed her son's Education, Health and Care plan, and it failed to put in place some agreed special educational needs provision. We found the Council caused unnecessary delays in reviewing the final amended EHC plan and to put in place the agreed provision for Mrs C's son, including delays in arranging her direct payment. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs C and make payment to acknowledge the distress and costs she had, including the loss of educational provision her son experienced. Buckinghamshire Council (22 003 547) Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about the Council's decision not to provide a personal budget for her child, or how it provided the therapeutic provision specified in a Education Health and Care plan. That is because it is a late complaint. London Borough of Ealing (22 004 604) Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the refusal of a school to reconsider its decision to permanently exclude Mr X's child following the recommendation of an Independent Review Panel. There is an absolute bar that prevents us investigating the action of a school. West Sussex County Council (22 004 356) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's refusal of a blue badge. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation. Hartlepool Borough Council (22 004 621) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has delayed dealing with a complaint about safeguarding. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault due to the exceptional circumstances involved. 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