LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to produce a Final Education Health and Care Plan for his child in the statutory timescales. We found fault with the Council for delaying production of Mr X’s child’s Education Health and Care Plan for seven months outside the statutory timescales. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him £700 to acknowledge the avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty caused.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to produce her child’s Education Health and Care Plan in the statutory timescales. Ms X also complained the Council failed to provide her child with full-time education since January 2023. We found fault with the Council delaying production of Ms X’s child’s Education Health and Care Plan. We did not find fault with the Council failing to provide suitable education for Ms X’s child. The Council agreed to provide an apology to Ms X and pay her £700 for the frustration and uncertainty caused by the delays in production of her child’s EHC Plan.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X complaint about the wording in the Council’s letter being incorrect. This is because an investigation would not lead to any different findings or outcomes. In addition, the fault has not caused any significant injustice to Mrs X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. This is because the Ombudsman is unlikely to add to the Council’s safeguarding and complaint investigations, which have achieved service improvements and an apology to the complainant. So, an Ombudsman investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to put in place the provision required under his son’s Education Health and Care Plan between March 2023 and January 2024. This is because the Council has offered Mr X a suitable financial remedy for the impact its failures had on him and his son.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms C’s complaint about the Council’s failure to assess Mr B’s finances and discuss his funding status with him or her, his daughter. This is because the Council has acknowledged the delay in completing Mr B’s financial assessment and cancelled the charges. We are satisfied this remedies the injustice caused by fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his child’s special educational needs. He complains the Council failed to consider and acknowledge its unlawful decision to cease to maintain an EHC plan, failed to provide educational provision following his appeal, and failed to communicate with him appropriately. This is because an investigation would not lead to any different findings or outcomes.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a possible data breach as this is best dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office. We also cannot achieve the outcome the complainant seeks.

Summary: Mrs Y complains about delays in the process leading up to the Council’s issuing of an Education, Health and Care Plan for her son, D. We find the Council failed to meet the statutory timescales and there was significant delay. The Council also failed to maintain appropriate contact with Mrs Y and delayed when responding to her complaint. The delay meant D missed some SEN provision throughout 2023. In our view, the agreed actions listed at the end of this statement will remedy the injustice caused by fault.

Summary: Miss X complained about the delays she encountered during her daughter’s Education, Health and Care needs assessment. We have found fault with the Council for the delays which then delayed Miss X’s right of appeal.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to deal with children’s social care properly. The Council is not at fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to restrict contact between Mr X and his partner. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

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.

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.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s communication with Mrs X about her eligibility for benefits. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about delays in producing an Education Health and Care Plan.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s actions regarding her child, Y’s, Education, Health and Care Plan and the Council’s communication. This is because the Council has already offered a suitable remedy in line with our guidance, and further investigation is unlikely to achieve a different outcome.

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s delay in carrying out an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment on her child Y who was receiving a part time education causing distress, uncertainty, and loss of education. The Council has accepted it was at fault and we have found there was service failure by the Council due to the delay in carrying out the needs assessment. The Council has already apologised to Ms X for the delay. It has offered her a payment for her time and trouble and distress caused. It has also offered a payment for the loss of education to Y during a term in 2022. We cons

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to properly assess risks to his child. This is because the reports prepared were for court hearings, and the Ombudsman cannot investigate matters considered by a court of law.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to secure the special educational needs provision in her child D’s Education, Health, and Care plan. The Council was at fault because it failed to ensure the plan was in place, which caused D to miss special educational needs provision. The Council’s fault also caused avoidable time and trouble for Mrs X in pursuing her complaint. The Council agreed to apologise and pay a financial remedy. It will also share a copy of our decision with, and issue reminders to, relevant staff.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed assessing her child, W, for an Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council was at fault. This caused Mrs X avoidable frustration and uncertainty and meant W missed out on one term of special educational provision. To remedy that injustice, the Council will apologise to Mrs X and pay her a total of £2075.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that a social worker was at fault in how she spoke to the complainant. This is because we could not add anything significant to the investigation the Council has carried out.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about administrative failings by the coroner’s officer. The complainant has not suffered personal injustice from these faults alone to justify an investigation. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider complaints about access to information. Also, complaints about the coroner’s investigation are outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: Miss X complained on behalf of Mr Y. Mr Y complained the Council completed an assessment without him being involved in the process. Mr Y also complained the Council cancelled his support without discussing it with him. Mr Y says he is not supported by the service, and this has affected his mental health. There was fault in the way the Council recorded its communication about the assessment but this did not affect the outcome and did not cause a significant injustice.

Summary: The Council was at fault for delays in finalising an Education, Health and Care Plan for Mrs X’s son. The delays have caused uncertainty about future education provision and delayed Mrs X being able to appeal to the SEND Tribunal. The Council has already apologised for the delays, and it has agreed to offer a financial remedy to properly recognise the injustice to Mrs X.