The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award home to school transport or amend an Education, Health and Care plan. This is because the is not enough evidence of fault and the complainant has a right of appeal to the tribunal.
The complaint
Miss X complained the Council has not awarded home to school transport. Nor amended her son, C’s, Education, Health and Care plan following an emergency annual review or when she told the Council of her change in circumstances.
She says this has left her son with an unsuitable plan that does not reflect his needs or the family situation and without transport to allow him to attend school.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended) The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the Tribunal in this decision statement.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
I understand Miss X’s circumstances have changed which led her to seeking home to school transport for C and she feels the Council has not considered this. However, we will not investigate her complaint about the Council’s decision not to award home to school transport. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. If we consider the Council followed is processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.
In this case the appeal considered Miss X comments about her change in circumstances and other relevant information. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to warrant further investigation.
I appreciate Miss X is concerned about the support her son is receiving and the wording of the EHC plan. However, we will not investigate her complaint. The Council’s decision not to amend C’s EHC plan is appealable to the tribunal. As Miss X has a right of appeal the law prevents us from investigating these matters.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process and she has a right of appeal to the tribunal about the content of the EHC plan. It is reasonable to expect her to use her right of appeal.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman