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. Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (23 005 108) Summary: The Council took too long to make alternative educational provision for Miss B's son when he was excluded from school and while he was waiting for a new school place to be confirmed with special educational provision. The Council also did not always communicate with Miss B properly. This caused Miss B distress and frustration and meant that her son went without the education he was entitled to. The Council has agreed to my recommendations to remedy the injustice it has caused. North Northamptonshire Council (23 009 595) Summary: We uphold a complaint about delay issuing Y's final Education Health and Care Plan for his post-16 placement. This caused avoidable frustration, uncertainty and a delay in appeal rights. The Council will apologise and make Ms X a symbolic payment of £150. London Borough of Bromley (23 010 075) Summary: Ms F complained about how the Council handled her son's Education, Health, and Care plan process and her request for a change of school placement. The Council agreed it caused an 8-month delay in finalising his plan due to a human error and apologised to Ms F. This was fault. We found its apology was not enough to remedy the injustice this caused. The Council should make a symbolic payment to Ms F and review its process to ensure such unnecessary delays do not reoccur. Devon County Council (23 013 618) Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide her child, F with an education or provision in their Education, Health and Care Plan since 2022. We ended this investigation because part of it occurred too long ago and the remaining period falls outside of our jurisdiction because Miss X had a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal which was reasonable for her to have used. Derbyshire County Council (23 013 769) Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to follow statutory timescales during the Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment for her daughter (D) and failed to provide alternative education. The Council is at fault for delay in assessing D and drafting a plan. As Ms X has appealed the final plan to the Tribunal, the Ombudsman cannot consider anything linked to the appeal. Suffolk County Council (23 016 739) Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about the Education Health and Care Plan process for her son. This is because Ms X has appealed to a tribunal and so the case is outside our jurisdiction. Dorset Council (23 019 094) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council failing to provide a copy of meeting notes, about the Council's handling of his subject access request, and about untrue statements made about him during the meeting. This is because there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. Gloucestershire County Council (23 019 587) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that a school has failed to implement appropriate support for a child to attend. This is because we are unable to investigate the internal management of schools. Redcar & Cleveland Council (23 019 668) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's conduct during the Education, Health and Care needs assessment process and a delay issuing the final plan. The matters have already been considered by a Tribunal and we could not achieve anything more. Devon County Council (23 004 403) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's Children's Services. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. Gloucestershire County Council (23 018 570) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about a delayed child in need assessment and an officer's comment. It is unlikely our investigation would reach a different outcome to the Council's. Derbyshire County Council (23 012 235) Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has delayed in carrying out an Education, Health, and Care (EHC) needs assessment and in issuing a EHC Plan for her daughter. The delay in completing Y's EHC needs assessment and in issuing a final EHC Plan is fault. This fault has caused Mrs X an injustice. Suffolk County Council (23 012 380) Summary: Mr F complained the Council delayed providing his daughter with an assisted listening device. He also says the Council failed to adhere to statutory timescales when dealing with his daughter's annual review and its communication with him was poor. We find the Council was at fault as it delayed communicating with the school to resolve the issue with the assisted listening device. It also did not adhere to statutory timescales when dealing with Mr F's daughter's annual review and it was at fault for its overall communication with Mr F. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault. London Borough of Bromley (23 012 716) Summary: Mrs X complains about how the Council handled her daughter, C's, Education, Health and Care Plan assessment. She says it delayed the statutory process and took too long to consult schools to check if they could meet C's needs. This meant that C was left with no educational and therapeutic provision for longer than necessary. Mrs X would like the Council to apologise for the delays and pay them for the distress its actions have caused. The Council was at fault for the delays in the assessment process. The Council agreed to our recommendations on how it should address the injustice its actions caused to Mrs X and C. Leicestershire County Council (23 015 150) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed an appropriate remedy. West Sussex County Council (23 018 654) Summary: We have upheld 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 injustice caused to the complainant by its delay. Hampshire County Council (23 019 258) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's failure to communicate with Mrs X before stopping school transport for her children with special educational needs. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome. Medway Council (23 019 463) Summary: We cannot not investigate this complaint about a delay in health appointments being arranged. That is because the Council is not responsible for the appointments. Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (23 018 820) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with child protection matters. This is because we cannot add to the investigation carried out by the Council or achieve the outcome the complainant seeks. Cambridgeshire County Council (23 019 524) Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a Council report. This is because the matters Ms X raises are subject to court proceedings. Lincolnshire County Council (23 007 626) Summary: Mr B complained the Council did not support his child with education during the 2022 / 23 academic year. We found fault because the Council's medical support panel did not take account of all relevant information known to it, or else that it could have obtained. It also failed to tell Mr B that it refused a request to carry out an education, health and care needs assessment. We consider these faults caused injustice as Mr B's child did not receive additional support with his education when recovering from a major operation. Mr B also suffered distress. The Council has accepted these findings and at the end of this statement we set out the action it has agreed to remedy his injustice and make service improvements for the future. Hertfordshire County Council (23 010 879) Summary: Mrs Y complains on Miss X's behalf about the Council's failure to secure speech and language provision for Miss X, as per her Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The Council's failure to arrange provision in the EHC Plan is fault. This has caused an injustice to Miss X and also Mrs Y. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused and it has agreed to implement service improvements. Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (23 012 879) Summary: Mrs X complained that a Council officer shouted and argued with her in a meeting. She said this caused unnecessary distress and upset. We do not find the Council at fault. Essex County Council (23 018 431) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed an appropriate remedy. Essex County Council (23 019 301) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X and pay her £100 per month for the delay. We consider this an appropriate remedy and further investigation is therefore unlikely to achieve anything more. Essex County Council (23 016 854) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's communication with Miss B around the Initial Child Protection Conference process. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. It is also unlikely that an Ombudsman investigation would lead to a different outcome. Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (23 017 655) Summary: We will not investigate X's complaint about Children Services' actions. It is unlikely we could achieve more and there are other bodies better placed to consider a data protection complaint and social worker's practice complaint. Cumberland Council (23 020 148) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay on the Council's part in completing the statutory procedure for complaints about children's services matters. This is because there is insufficient outstanding injustice to warrant investigation. Kent County Council (23 009 930) Summary: Mrs X complained the Council unfairly refused her application and appeal for post 16 home to school transport for her child, Y. We have ended our investigation as the Council has agreed to offer Mrs X a fresh appeal due to a change in circumstances. Oxfordshire County Council (23 010 442) Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's handling of her son, F's education and his Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan since 2021. The Council was at fault. It failed to issue an amended EHC Plan following an annual review in February 2022. It also failed to ensure F received an education or the specialist provision in line with his EHC Plan between February 2022 and February 2023 when he was unable to attend school. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X and make payments to acknowledge the impact on F's education and the distress and uncertainty caused to her. Somerset Council (23 014 618) Summary: We uphold a complaint about a delay in issuing a child's final Education Health and Care Plan and about poor communication with the child's parents. The Plan was five months late which is fault. Communication was not in line with our expected standards. This is fault causing avoidable distress, uncertainty and delaying rights of appeal. The Council will apologise, make payments and take action set out in this statement to minimise recurrence. Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (23 015 250) Summary: The Council was at fault for not doing more to identify any potential risks from Mr B's contact with his family while he was in care. It also accepted fault for a number of other things before our involvement. The Council has agreed to offer Mr B an apology and a symbolic financial remedy, in addition to what it offered him before he complained to us. It will also explain to us how it intends to improve its service. Medway Council (23 019 488) Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council's decision not to consider her complaint because she does not have parental responsibility for her grandchildren. Hertfordshire County Council (23 019 715) Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X's complaint about the Council removing her children from her care under false pretences because the Ombudsman cannot investigate matters which are being dealt with in a court of law. Central Bedfordshire Council (23 007 026) Summary: Mr X complains about delay and failure to deliver provision outlined in Y's EHCP. We have concluded our investigation having made a finding of fault. There was delay in finalising Y's EHCP, and the Council failed to provide Y with a laptop that could be used outside of the educational setting. We acknowledge that whilst 1:1 support and co-ordination of the educational package have not been delivered as per the terms of the order, Y has not been caused a significant injustice as this provision has been delivered through Provider A. The Council has accepted our recommendations. Devon County Council (23 012 914) Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed completing her child, F's Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment in line with statutory timescales. The Council was at fault. It failed to decide whether to issue F with an EHC Plan within the statutory timescale, caused by a delay in obtaining Educational Psychologist advice. This caused a further delay in the Council issuing F's final EHC Plan and delayed Mrs X's right of appeal to the SEND tribunal. The Council agreed to make payments to Mrs X to acknowledge the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused to her. London Borough of Brent (23 013 607) Summary: Mrs X complains about how the Council handled her son, S's, Education, Health, and Care Plan. Mrs X said the Council's failures caused avoidable stress to her, but also to S who was upset about not having a college place in time for September 2023. The Council was at fault for the delays in securing a college place and poor communication about the progress with Mrs X. The Council offered her a financial remedy for the distress, and we consider it to be in line with our guidance. The Council also agreed to make a symbolic payment for the avoidable frustration and effort Mrs X went to because of the Council's poor communication with her. Coventry City Council (23 018 347) Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about the inadequacy of a section 7 court report because we cannot investigate complaints about reports prepared for court action or the way court action is handled. We will not investigate her complaints about the Council's handling of the child in need process because the Council has offered an appropriate remedy and there is nothing we could add to its investigation. Lincolnshire County Council (23 018 646) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alternative educational provision. Miss X was above compulsory school age when she was unable to attend the placement named in her Education Health and Care Plan, and the Council had no duty to offer alternative educational provision. It met its duty by reviewing the Plan and issuing a fresh Plan within the time allowed. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council's action to warrant further investigation by us. Nottinghamshire County Council (23 018 648) Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about home to school transport issues. We are unlikely to find she needs a remedy for any injustice caused directly by Council fault. Hertfordshire County Council (23 019 079) Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X's complaint about the Council's actions during the Education, Health and Care Plan needs assessment and appeals process. This is because Ms X has used her right of appeal to a tribunal. Medway Council (23 019 157) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the school transport arrangements for the complainant's daughter. There is not enough evidence of fault for us to be able to question the merits of the Council's decisions. It is reasonable for Mrs X to pursue a further appeal with the Council if she has fresh evidence in support of her case. London Borough of Waltham Forest (23 019 274) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's decision not to provide an Education, Health and Care plan. This is because Mrs X had a right of appeal to the SEND tribunal that she has either used or could reasonably have used. London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (21 014 731) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council restricting his contact with his grandchild or that it stopped him from becoming their connected carer. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council considered his complaint to justify our involvement. The Council has accepted there were delays in its complaint handling. It has agreed to pay Mr X £200 to remedy any injustice caused. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would not be proportionate. St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (23 012 158) Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council considered his complaint about child protection matters through the children's statutory complaint procedure. We found the Council delayed in completing some of the statutory complaint procedure. It agreed to make a symbolic payment to Mr X to recognise the distress this caused. Blackburn with Darwen Council (23 018 967) Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about financial support provided for a child Mrs X cares for. A special guardianship order was decided by a court and Mrs X was legally represented. Financial support could reasonably have been raised during the court process and we cannot act in an auxiliary or supplementary role. Nottingham City Council (23 019 259) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's handling of a reported data breach in 2022. This is because the complaint is late and there is no good reason to investigate now. Devon County Council (23 019 584) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council is holding and processing inaccurate information about the complainant. This is because the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider the matter. 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