The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: the Council accepted it had not supported Ms M and B as it should with transition from school to college, and two transport payments were late. The Council apologised and made changes to address the problems. This is a satisfactory outcome.
The complaint
Ms M complains about: the lack of support from the Council with transition from school to college for her son, B; and problems with payments for B’s college transport.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms M and the Council.
I invited Ms M and the Council to comment on my draft decision.
What I found
Ms M’s son, B, has an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan maintained by the Council. He started college in September 2020.
Ms M and B visited the nearest college but decided it would not be suitable. They chose a college further away.
The Council declined Ms M’s application for transport because B did not attend the nearest college. Ms M appealed the Council’s decision. An independent appeal panel upheld her appeal and agreed to pay a mileage allowance.
Ms M complained to us in August 2021. She said she was unhappy with the support the Council had provided for B’s transition to college the previous year, and the Council had not paid her mileage claims for the spring and summer terms in 2021.
As required by law, we invited the Council to respond directly to Ms M’s complaint in the first instance. The Council responded at both stages of its complaints process.
The Council acknowledged it had not supported Ms M and B as it should with transition from school to college. In particular, the Council accepted it should have told Ms M its policy was only to provide transport to the nearest college. The Council explained the changes it had made to the structure and caseload management of its SEN teams to better support parents and pupils during transition between phases of education.
The Council followed up the missing transport payments, which were finally made in December 2021.
The Council apologised for its mistakes.
Unhappy with the Council’s response, Ms M complained to us again early in 2022. Ms M was particularly unhappy that: although the Council upheld her complaint about the missing transport payments at stage one, she had to complain at the second stage of the Council’s complaints process before she received the missing transport payments; and the Council said she did not submit her transport claims as directed and had therefore contributed to the confusion.
Ms M is very unhappy at the Council’s suggestion she contributed to the confusion surrounding the processing of her transport payments. She says that while the Council’s paperwork says claims should be “validated” by the college, it does not say they must be “stamped”. Ms M says her first claim was paid without being stamped. Ms M says she was corresponding by email with a manager who said she should email her claims directly to her, and this is why she did not use the team’s mailbox address on the form. Ms M sent me her correspondence with the manager.
I appreciate Ms M’s frustration. However, my job requires me to consider not only whether there was fault, but whether further action is proportionate and an appropriate use of public resources. Ms M’s complaints, and the Council’s detailed responses, have highlighted potential problems, both in arrangements for transition from school to college, and in the processing of transport payments. The Council apologised, explained the changes it intended to make, and Ms M has now finally received the payments she was due.
The only outstanding issue is Ms M’s objection to the Council finding she contributed to the confusion surrounding her transport payments. It is true that a manager invited her to send the completed forms directly to her. However, I am less persuaded by Ms M’s arguments about lack of clarity in the need for claims to be “validated”. The form has a section for an “official stamp” and signature.
I do not consider there to be significant outstanding injustice that needs to be remedied or processes that need to be improved. Those tasks have already been accomplished by Ms M’s complaint to the Council.
Therefore, in line with the Council’s findings, I propose to uphold Ms M’s complaint about B’s transition to college and the delay in making the transport payments. However, I am satisfied the Council has taken appropriate action and, now Ms M has received the payments, I do not intend to pursue matters further.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation. The Council accepted it had not supported Ms M and B as it should with transition from school to college, and the spring and summer transport payments were late. The Council has apologised and made changes to address the problems. This is a satisfactory outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman