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.

Staffordshire County Council (23 015 305)

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to ensure her child Q received suitable education and provision in their Education, Health, and Care Plan. There was fault by the Council which caused Q to miss special educational needs support. This also caused distress to Q and Mrs X. The Council agreed to apologise, evidence it is taking action to ensure Q's provision is in place, and pay a financial remedy. It will also review its processes and issue reminders to staff.

Surrey County Council (24 009 196)

Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to make suitable education provision for Y when the family moved into the area. The Council was at fault as it delayed in making education provision for Y, failed to explain why it considered a school was suitable, delayed in carrying out an annual review of Y's Education, Health and Care Plan and delayed in issuing an amended Plan. This meant Y missed education provision between March and July 2024 and the faults caused distress to Mrs X. The Council has appropriately remedied the loss of education provision between April and July 2024 but it has agreed to make a symbolic payment of £400 to Mrs X to remedy a further two weeks of missed provision. The Council has also agreed to make a symbolic payment of £500 to Mrs X to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty caused to her by the delay in issuing the amended Education, Health and Care plan and failure to explain why a school was suitable.

North Yorkshire Council (24 009 780)

Summary: Ms X complained that the Council failed to provide her child, Y with suitable education since November 2023. She also complained about its poor communication and delays handling her complaint. We find the Council at fault. This impacted Y's education and caused avoidable distress and uncertainty to Ms X. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Ms X, and consider allowing Y to remain at their current school for an additional year.

Leeds City Council (24 012 017)

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council's conduct during her appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) about her child D's Education, Health, and Care Plan. She also said the Council failed to ensure D received the Education, Health, and Care Plan provision while her appeal was ongoing. We cannot investigate how the Council conducted itself during the Tribunal appeal process. However, the Council failed to ensure D received special educational needs provision while the appeal was ongoing. This fault caused D to miss provision, and distress to D and Miss X. The Council agreed to apologise, pay a financial remedy, and review its processes for checking Education, Health, and Care Plan provision is in place.

Medway Council (24 012 359)

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council's delay issuing her child, Y's Education, Health and Care Plan. We find fault, causing distress and uncertainty for Miss X. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Miss X.

Surrey County Council (24 014 531)

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's decision to decline Mr Y's application for school transport assistance. Mrs X says Mr Y will not be able to access his education if transport assistance is not provided. We do not find fault with how the Council considered Mrs X's application or appeals.

Leeds City Council (24 019 055)

Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed carrying out an Education Health and Care needs assessment for a child. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint by making a suitable payment to the complainant to remedy the injustice this caused.

Durham County Council (24 019 162)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to make alternative educational provision for the complainant's daughter while she has been unable to attend school. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council's part to warrant investigation.

Leeds City Council (24 019 454)

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about delays by the Council in issuing an Education, Health and Care Plan. This is because the Council has already offered a suitable remedy for injustice caused by the delay and further investigation by us is unlikely to achieve anything more.

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (24 003 351)

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly assess her child D's eligibility for overnight respite care through its disabled children's service. The Council made its decision properly that D should receive daytime short breaks but not overnight respite. However, it was at fault because it delayed its assessments and failed to consider Mrs X's complaint via the statutory complaints procedure for children's social care services. This caused a delay in D receiving daytime short breaks, and avoidable time and trouble for Mrs X. The Council agreed to apologise and pay a financial remedy. It will also issue reminders to its staff and review its processes.

North East Lincolnshire Council (24 007 895)

Summary: We found fault on Mr Y's complaint about the way the Council dealt with allegations against him which it referred to the Local Authority Designated Officer. Minutes were not accurate and failed to show consideration of a recommendation. This caused him lost opportunity and uncertainty about whether the recommendation needed further action. The Council agreed to send him a written apology, remind relevant officers to ensure recommendations from previous meetings are considered and decided, as well as reminding minute takers of the need to accurately record those in attendance.

Southampton City Council (24 014 755)

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X's complaint about data breaches by the Council. This is because it is about data matters which are best considered and decided by the Information Commissioner's Office.

Nottinghamshire County Council (24 019 715)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's contact with Mr X during an assessment of his child. The Council has already taken steps to address his concerns, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. In any case we could not achieve the outcome he is seeking.

Birmingham City Council (24 019 785)

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X's complaint about the Council's handling of her Subject Access Request. The Information Commissioner's Office is the appropriate body to consider her complaint.

Leeds City Council (24 019 943)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's decision not to conclude its consideration of a complaint by a former foster carer. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council's part to warrant investigation.

Liverpool City Council (24 020 817)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the actions of the Council's children's services. This is because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council or achieve a different outcome. The Information Commissioner is better placed to consider Mr X's complaint about an alleged data breach.

Cornwall Council (24 009 366)

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide alternative education for her child Y when they were unable to attend school between September 2023 and August 2024. Mrs X also complained the Council delayed in completing an Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment and issuing an EHC Plan for Y. The Council failed to consider if it should provide Y alternative provision and delayed issuing an EHC Plan for Y for 35 weeks which resulted in Y missing out on some special educational provision for two academic terms. The Council will make a payment to Mrs X to recognise the injustice caused by the faults and act to improve its service.

London Borough of Havering (24 010 761)

Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not consider his and his family's health conditions and disabilities when it decided which schools his children should go to and that it would not provide transport for the children to get to school. The Council failed to consider Mr X's school transport application properly which caused him frustration and uncertainty. The Council will apologise and hold an independent appeal panel to reconsider Mr X's school transport application.

West Sussex County Council (24 019 948)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the conduct of a driver for his child, Y's, home to school transport. This is because an investigation is unlikely to achieve any additional outcome.

Lancashire County Council (24 020 621)

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.

Birmingham City Council (24 020 815)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to be able to question its decision.

Cambridgeshire County Council (24 020 681)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's involvement in the complainant's child's case. The matters are too closely connected to ongoing court proceedings.

Somerset Council (24 004 171)

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed updating her child's Education, Health and Care Plan following the annual review meeting in February 2024. Mrs X also complained the Council to failed to secure the promised educational provision for her child by September 2024. We found fault with the Council delaying for four and a half months in completing the annual review process of Mrs X's child's Education, Health and Care Plan. We also found fault with the Council naming an incorrect educational placement in the Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X and pay her £200 for the avoidable distress and inconvenience caused. The Council also agreed to complete an annual review of Mrs X's child's Education, Health and Care Plan in which it considers access to education and the request to complete a reassessment.

London Borough of Bromley (24 007 654)

Summary: Ms B complained the Council failed to put in place provision in her daughter's education, health and care plan. I am satisfied some of the claimed missing provision was in place but the Council failed to put in place the speech and language therapy. The Council also failed to make its own enquiries with the school when Ms B complained. That means Ms B's daughter missed out on speech and language therapy and Ms B experienced distress. An apology, payment to Ms B and reminder to officers is satisfactory remedy.

Leeds City Council (24 009 672)

Summary: Ms X complains the Council advised her to have contact with her ex-partner despite a history of domestic abuse. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is about the Council's actions during court proceedings which the law prevents us investigating, and related matters that are not separable from the court proceedings.

Dorset Council (24 012 713)

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has not properly delivered the provision in her child's Education Health and Care Plan since 2021. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X.

Derbyshire County Council (24 013 816)

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X's complaint about the Council's failure to name a school on her child's Education Health and Care Plan. This is because she has used her right of appeal to a tribunal about the same matter. It is unlikely investigation into other matters would lead to a different outcome.

Lancashire County Council (24 013 991)

Summary: Dr X complained the Council took too long to assess her child for an Education, Health and Care Plan, and that it delayed issuing the final Plan. The Council was at fault. This caused Dr X avoidable uncertainty and frustration, for which the Council should apologise and pay her £2,400. It should also issue Dr X's child's Education, Health and Care Plan.

Medway Council (24 017 077)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's handling of Ms X's request for home to school transport. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council for us to question its decision. Also, the Council has now granted transport which is the outcome Ms X wanted. An investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to different outcome or achieve anything more.

Devon County Council (24 019 029)

Summary: We have upheld Mr X's complaint about the Council's delay in completing his child Education, Health and Care needs assessment. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Brighton & Hove City Council (24 019 244)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's consultation into changes to its school admission arrangements. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Bracknell Forest Council (24 019 874)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about poor communication from the Council. This is because this alone has not caused Mrs X a significant enough injustice to justify our involvement.

Lancashire County Council (24 020 153)

Lancashire County Council (24 004 288)

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council wrongly claims she is caring for her grandchildren as a private arrangement and has failed to provide appropriate support. We found there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council carried out the investigation under the statutory complaints procedure. The Council has accepted and acted on the investigations findings and recommendations and we cannot add anything significant to the investigation.

Hampshire County Council (24 019 935)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council was at fault in ceasing the complainant's foster care payments. This is because investigation would not add anything significant to the response the Council has already made, or lead to a different outcome.

Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (24 021 524)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about a personal data breach. This is because complaints about data matters, such as this, are best considered and decided by the Information Commissioner's Office.

Kent County Council (24 021 637)

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X's complaint about matters relating to the Council's child protection involvement with her child. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council's decision not to consider her complaint whilst the case is subject to ongoing court proceedings.

Warrington Council (24 022 227)

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X's complaint about the Council's section 7 court report. We have no jurisdiction to look at matters subject to court proceedings.

Hampshire County Council (24 022 326)

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X's complaint about a social worker's evidence given to a Court.

Buckinghamshire Council (24 018 924)

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X's complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to apologise to Miss 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.

Buckinghamshire Council (24 019 197)

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.

Buckinghamshire Council (24 019 208)

Bracknell Forest Council (24 019 670)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay in an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment and the Council's decision not to obtain a Speech and Language assessment. This is because investigation would not add anything significant to the response the Council has already made, or lead to a different outcome.

Bracknell Forest Council (24 019 672)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint that the Council was at fault in naming a school in the complainant's child's Education Health and Care plan. This is because the complainant has used her right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability), and this places the matter outside the Ombudsman's jurisdiction.

Essex County Council (24 020 432)

Essex County Council (24 021 027)

Essex County Council (24 021 216)

Essex County Council (24 021 246)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him £100 per month for the delay. We consider this an appropriate remedy and further investigation is therefore unlikely to achieve anything more.

Leicestershire County Council (24 019 728)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to act to safeguard the complainant's daughter. This is because the complaint concerns matters which are the subject of legal action and are for the Court to decide.

Cornwall Council (24 005 201)

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council's delays in issuing her son's Education, Care and Health Plan in time for phase transfer and following an annual review in March 2024. She also complained about lack of suitable education between September 2024 and December 2024 when the Council failed to find a secondary school place and delay in the Council's response to her complaint. We found the Council was at fault for lack of accurate record keeping, delay in issuing Plans and responding to Ms X's complaint. The Council agreed to pay Ms X for the avoidable distress and uncertainty and issue reminders to staff.

Somerset Council (24 010 640)

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's failure to secure educational provision in her child's Education, Health and Care Plan. Mrs X said not receiving that necessary support badly affected her child's education and wellbeing and caused distress. We found there was avoidable delay by the Council in securing provision in the Plan. In recognition of the resulting avoidable distress and time and trouble, the Council agreed to secure the educational provision and both apologise to Mrs X and make a symbolic payment of £1,000.

Essex County Council (24 011 501)

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's refusal to pay her child, Y's, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan personal budget to her direct, in advance. She says the Council insisted on using its own system which limited her choice of tutors and meant they had to be paid in arrears. The Council was not at fault. It was entitled to use its own system and exercised its discretion to set up alternative payments for Y's tuition. There is no evidence Y's choice of tutor has been limited.

Essex County Council (24 018 542)

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X's complaint about the Council's failure to provide alternative provision. There is inadequate evidence of fault to warrant investigation

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (24 018 925)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council is at fault in refusing the complainant's application and appeal for school transport for her daughter. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council's part to warrant investigation.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council (24 019 070)

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X's complaint about the Council's refusal to provide school transport for her child. This is because we are unlikely to find fault to warrant investigation.

West Northamptonshire Council (24 019 654)

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about how the Council dealt with matters concerning a tribunal appeal, or about the education and special educational needs provision provided by the Council. The law prevents us from investigating complaints about matters subject to appeals to a tribunal, and investigation into other matters would not lead to a different outcome.

London Borough of Hillingdon (24 020 049)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the conduct of a review panel that considered the permanent exclusion of Mrs X's child from a school. This is because the school is an academy and we have no legal power to investigate the conduct of review panels for academy school.

London Borough of Lambeth (24 004 620)

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about the Council stopping her contact with her grandchild. The law prevents us from investigating anything that has been the subject of court proceedings. It would be reasonable for Mrs X to take her concerns about court ordered contact arrangements back to court.

Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (24 019 106)

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council's Children's Services involvement with his family because it lies outside our jurisdiction. The law prevents us from considering complaints about matters that have been considered in court proceedings.

Cumberland Council (24 019 276)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council's actions concerning the care of Ms X's children. The matters complained of are closely linked to matters subject to court action and we are legally prevented from investigating them.

Somerset Council (24 019 690)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council's handling of a safeguarding matter involving his child. There is nothing more we could add to the Council's responses or achieve the outcome he wants. Mr X's concern about disclosure of confidential information is for the Information Commissioner's Office.

Surrey County Council (24 006 832)

Summary: Mrs M complains the Council failed to arrange alternative education for her daughter, G, when she became unable to attend school. The Council relied on G's school to make a referral even though the Council's inclusion service was aware of problems. The Council has not considered its duty to make alternative arrangements for G's education despite knowing she has not attended school since March 2024. The Council has agreed to consider its duty and make a symbolic payment to acknowledge the impact of the delay.

Surrey County Council (24 009 014)

Summary: Mrs D complained the Council failed to provide her children with education or with the special educational needs support set out in their education, health and care plans. I have discontinued my investigation into one part of the complaint. We found fault in the other part. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to remedy the loss of education and SEND provision for one of her sons.

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (24 009 881)

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council always pays a direct payment, set out in her son, Y's, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan, late. Mrs X said this places additional financial pressure on her, as well as causing her frustration and distress. There was fault in the way the Council delayed making payments and did not clearly explain what the payment was for. This frustrated Mrs X and impacted her financially. The Council should apologise, make a financial payment and provide training for its staff.

Buckinghamshire Council (24 010 348)

Summary: Ms X complained the Council did not provide an appropriate remedy when it accepted it delayed completing an annual review of her son, Y's, Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan and failed to provide his educational provision for one academic year. The Council did not provide an appropriate remedy for the year of education and special educational provision Y did not receive. The Council will pay Ms X £2,450 to recognise the injustice caused to Y.

Cornwall Council (24 011 434)

Summary: Mrs X complained that since 2021, the Council has not updated her child Y's Education, Health and Care Plan or provided Y with an education. We find the Council at fault, resulting in a loss of education for Y. This has impacted Y's mental health and caused Mrs X avoidable distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mrs X, and issue a final amended Education, Health and Care Plan.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council (24 017 700)

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about delays in producing an Education Health and Care Plan as it is unlikely we would achieve a significantly different remedy. As Mrs X has used her right to appeal to the Tribunal we cannot investigate her complaint about the Council's decision to name a school on an Education Health and Care Plan.

Hampshire County Council (24 019 094)

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about Education Health and Care Plan decisions. She appealed one decision to the Tribunal, and it is reasonable to expect her to appeal another. We are unlikely to achieve significantly more than the Council has offered for a short delay in the process.

Lancashire County Council (24 019 200)

Hertfordshire County Council (24 019 456)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about The Council not naming the right provision for Mrs X's child on an Education Health and Care Plan. Mrs X has used her right to appeal to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal and we cannot act in an auxiliary role by recommending further remedy or the reimbursement of legal costs.

Essex County Council (24 019 778)

Essex County Council (24 020 339)

Dorset Council (24 002 611)

Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council failed to progress a complaint to stage two of the children's statutory complaints procedure. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint by progressing the complaint to stage two and completing its investigation without further delay. It will also apologise and offer to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the time and trouble he has been to.

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (24 006 783)

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about the Council's action since placing their grandson in their care in August 2022. They complain the Council has failed to provide appropriate financial and practical support to assist them in caring for their grandson. We found the Council's failure follow proper procedure when it placed their grandson in Mr and Mrs X's care is fault. As was the failure to provide clear information, explanations and support, including financial support. These faults have affected Mr and Mrs X's health and wellbeing and caused them significant financial difficulties. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr and Mrs X and carry out the stage two report and stage three panel recommendations to address these faults.

Leicestershire County Council (24 016 809)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's engagement with Mr X in matters relating to his children's welfare. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault causing injustice and we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

Halton Borough Council (24 019 158)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the adequacy of the Council's actions before a baby Mrs X and her husband fostered was returned to its birth parents. The matters complained of are closely linked to the decision of a court about returning the child and we are legally prevented from investigating them.

Suffolk County Council (24 019 370)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the refusal of the Council to conduct a mental health assessment of Mr X's and to incorporate the result into the child's Education Health and Care Plan. Doing so would be unlikely to lead to us recommending any more than the Council, as it agreed after discussion with Mr X to carry out an assessment by a psychologist. If the assessment eventually feeds into a part of the final Education Health and Care Plan that can be appealed to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal, it would also be reasonable for Mr X to use that right of appeal to seek changes in provision.

Wiltshire Council (24 019 534)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council's handling of matters relating to his children. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Leicester City Council (24 019 581)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council's warning to him about his unacceptable communication. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.


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, May 29, 2025

New children and education complaint decisions

A weekly update on children and education complaint decisions

No comments:

Post a Comment