LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council considers school transport applications for children in her village. We do not find fault with how the Council assesses these applications or how it responded to Miss X’s application.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay by the Council issuing an Education Health and Care Plan and the delivery of SEN provision and alternative education. Investigation by us would not be likely to lead to a worthwhile outcome. The Council has already offered a suitable remedy for the injustice caused by the late issue of the Plan for Mrs X’s child. The child’s inability to engage with the alternative provision offered in the autumn of 2023 means we could not say the Council should have done more. And a legal judgement prevents us considering what educational provision w

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the delivery of provision in her child’s Education, Health and Care Plan. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. An investigation would be unlikely to add anything to the response Mrs X has already received or achieve a worthwhile outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of adult social care charges because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide her son Y with a suitable full-time education. We found fault by the Council which meant Y missed some education provision. It also caused Mrs X distress and frustration. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment in recognition of the injustice caused to Y and Mrs X.

Summary: Miss X complained about delays during the annual review of her child’s Education, Health and Care Plan and the Council failing to ensure occupational therapy provision was provided. Miss X said the delay meant her child missed provision and support in school leading to a deterioration in his mental health and no longer being able to attend mainstream school. We found fault by the Council but consider the action it had already offered of an apology and symbolic payment provided a suitable remedy.

Summary: Ms X complained her child was out of school since April 2022 and received no education. The Council upheld her complaint, and we found it offered a suitable remedy. The Council also said it would put alternative provision in place. We found the Council failed to do so, but it has agreed to provide a further remedy for the additional missed education.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the adequacy of education and related matters. There are no good reasons the late complaint rule should not apply for part of it. We cannot investigate issues before a Tribunal. And it is unlikely we would achieve significantly more than the Council has offered for her complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to appropriately address reports of flooding to his property, and its handling of the matter. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Miss X complained about delays in her son, Y’s, Education, Health and Care Plan annual review process. She also complained the Council did not ensure Y received any education and EHC Plan provision. Miss X said this distressed her and Y missed education and provision. There was fault in the way the Council did not ensure Y received education and plan provision, delayed the annual review process and record keeping was poor. This fault frustrated Ms X’s appeal rights and distressed her. Y missed education and plan provision. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a financial payment,

Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council considers school transport applications for children in her village. We do not find fault with how the Council assesses these applications. We find the Council at fault for delays in considering Miss X’s appeal. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to recognise the uncertainty caused.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to arrange suitable education for her child, G, and failed to secure the special educational provision in G’s Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council was at fault over two terms. This caused Mrs X frustration and meant G missed out on provision they should have had. To remedy their injustice, the Council will apologise to Mrs X, pay her a symbolic amount and arrange funding for G to attend enriching activities. It will also issue a staff reminder.

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council considers school transport applications for children in his village. We find the Council at fault for providing Mr X with incorrect information and failing to invite him to an appeal hearing or provide a written outcome to this. We do not find fault with how the Council assessed Mr X’s application or appeal. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and make a payment to recognise the uncertainty caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to revoke her resident’s parking permit which had previously been issued in error. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision to revoke the permit.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s delay in finalising her child’s education, health and care plan within the required statutory timescales and failing to provide her child with a suitable education when they were unable to attend school due to health needs. The Council is at fault and it has agreed to remedy the injustice caused by apologising to Mrs X and providing her with a symbolic remedy payment for the delay.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care Plan process, any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. In addition, any injustice is not significant enough to warrant our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education, Health and Care Plan process for the complainant’s child. This is because the complainant has used their right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability). This places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education, Health and Care Plan process for the complainant’s child. This is because it was reasonable for Mrs X to use her right of appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide his daughter with post-16 transport to school. The Council has now agreed to provide transport for the rest of the academic year. An investigation could not achieve anything more at the current time.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to repair a road sign. This is because the issue does not cause him significant injustice and we cannot investigate the alleged waste of public funds as the law bars us from considering complaints about matters which affect ‘all or most’ of the people in a council’s area.

Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council considers school transport applications for children in her village. We do not find fault with how the Council assesses these applications. We find the Council at fault for delays in considering Mrs X’s initial application and stage one appeal, and for providing incorrect information. We recommend the Council apologise and make a payment to recognise the uncertainty caused.

Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council considers school transport applications for children in her village. We do not find fault with how the Council assesses these applications. We find the Council at fault for delays in considering Miss X’s appeal. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to recognise the uncertainty caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the education provision for a child. This is because the issues raised have either previously been considered, are inseparable from an appeal to the SEND Tribunal or have not caused a significant injustice to the complainant.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to fell trees on its land. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We have found fault with the Council for not arranging suitable full-time education after Mr X’s son, Y was permanently excluded from school. This caused Y and his family avoidable distress. The Council agreed to apologise and make a remedy payment to Mr X in recognition of the missed education and distress caused.