LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Not Upheld

Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council

22-001-867 · Education › Special Educational Needs · Decision date: 31 August 2022 · View Windsor and Maidenhead Council scorecard

Full Decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide her child with suitable education since November 2021. The Council is taking court proceedings against Mrs X for Y’s lack of attendance at her educational setting. Since the matters complained about are inextricably linked to matters considered in the court proceedings it is not suitable for us to investigate this matter further. I have used our general discretion to end the investigation.

The complaint

Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide her child, Y, with education since November 2021.

Mrs X says Y has not attended school since November 2021 and the Council has failed to provide suitable alternative provision.

Mrs X says she has enrolled Y onto online learning while she has been unable to attend school and incurred the cost of this in the absence of Council provision.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

How I considered this complaint

As part of the investigation, I have: Considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant; and Made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments from the Council.

Mrs X and the Council had opportunity to comment on my draft decision before I reached my final decision.

What I found

What happened In November 2021, Y stopped attending her mainstream educational setting because of anxiety.

Mrs X wrote to Y’s school and the Council in January 2022 to formally request support for Y. Mrs X said the Council had a duty to arrange suitable education for Y because she could not attend school because of health reasons.

The Council reviewed Y’s case and decided Y could access education in a mainstream school. The Council created an initial Special Educational Needs plan for Y to help her in reintegrating into the school setting.

Mrs X complained to the Council about both its, and the school’s, inaction. By May 2022, the Council provided a Stage 2 complaint response to Mrs X advising of decision that Y could attend school. The Council said the school was responsible for completing the school register confirming whether Y’s absence was authorised or not.

Mrs X complained to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman about the Council’s failure to provide suitable education.

Because of Y’s continued unauthorised absence from school, the Council engaged court proceedings against Mrs X under Section 444(1A) of the Education Act 1996.

In response to our enquiries, the Council confirmed it had scheduled a court date for Mrs X to address Y’s unauthorised absence.

Analysis Mrs X’s complaint about the Council failing to provide suitable education for Y is a matter the Ombudsman could investigation. However, since beginning the investigation into the complaint, the Council has confirmed it has taken court proceedings against Mrs X.

The Council’s court proceedings about Y’s absence from school is inextricably linked to Mrs X’s complaint about the lack of provision from the Council to enable Y to attend school. As a result, it is not appropriate territory for an Ombudsman’s investigation.

I will therefore use the Ombudsman’s general discretion to discontinue our investigation.

Final decision

I have discontinued my investigation.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman