London Borough of Wandsworth (21 007 959)

Statement Upheld School transport 25-Mar-2022

Summary: the Council planned practical support to build G’s confidence and ensure her journey to a new school was safe and manageable for her. However, G went to a different school and the Council paid for taxis instead. The Council appears to have stopped paying for taxis without carrying out a review. Ms M wants the Council to provide long-term school transport, but the Council has not considered her request. The Council has agreed to carry out the review and consider Ms M’s request.

Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (21 009 815)

Statement Upheld School admissions 25-Mar-2022

Summary: Mrs Y complains about the conduct of the Council’s presenting officer before a school admission appeal hearing. She complains the Council failed to respond to her complaint. We have upheld Mrs Y’s complaint that the Council has failed to respond to her complaint. This caused Mrs Y uncertainty. To remedy this, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs Y, make her a payment and put her complaint through its complaints process.

Worcestershire County Council (20 012 753)

Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Mar-2022

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide her daughter with alternative educational provision while she was out of school and delayed the Education, Health and Care plan procedure. The Council accepts it failed to provide educational provision and offered an apology and a payment toward childcare costs. We find the Council acted with fault and the remedy offered did not reflect the injustice caused. The Council has agreed to our further recommendations to reflect the injustice caused by fault.

London Borough of Newham (21 002 639)

Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Mar-2022

Summary: Mr C complained that the Council took too long to prepare an education, health and care plan for his son, X. The Council has accepted it was at fault. The fault caused Mr C injustice in the form of distress and frustration. However, it did not adversely affect X’s education. As the Council is already working with the Department for Education to improve its special educational needs systems, we have made no recommendations for systems improvements. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay Mr C a sum in recognition of the distress the family has been caused.

Wiltshire Council (21 006 054)

Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Mar-2022

Summary: Mr E complained the Council failed to consult him when it assessed if his son should have an Education, Health and Care Plan and took too long to correct statements in that plan which were inaccurate or distressing to him. He also complained it had not done enough to monitor education his son has received at home, being provided by the child’s mother. We upheld the first part of the complaint but considered the Council had provided a satisfactory remedy for any injustice caused to Mr E.

Kent County Council (20 010 067)

Statement Upheld School transport 24-Mar-2022

Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision not to fund all four legs of her journeys to take her child to and from school. She also complains about the way the Council calculated the distance between home and school for Personal Transport Budgets (PTB). The Council was at fault because it did not offer free arranged school transport to Mrs X’s child before she chose to use a PTB. The Council has agreed to apologise, reimburse additional travel costs and make a payment to Mrs X for her time and trouble. The Council will also amend its PTB policy to clarify the voluntary nature of the scheme and highlight this to current PTB users.

London Borough of Brent (21 003 637)

Statement Not upheld School transport 24-Mar-2022

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint that alleged the complainant’s son missed education due to a lack of risk assessments by the Council’s special needs transport service.

Worcestershire County Council (21 017 700)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries School exclusions 24-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the permanent exclusion from school of Miss X’s child. We cannot investigate the actions of a school. Miss X was offered a right of appeal to an independent review panel organised by the Council. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

Surrey County Council (21 004 460)

Statement Upheld Special educational needs 23-Mar-2022

Summary: There was fault by the Council in complaint handling for which it has already apologised. We do not uphold a complaint about the Council changing the EHC plan in a way not intended by the Tribunal’s order.

London Borough of Hillingdon (21 011 741)

Statement Upheld School transport 23-Mar-2022

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s decision on her son’s school transport, resulting in distress to her son and inconvenience to her. We find the Council at fault for not following its published process, but this did not affect the Council’s decision making. We recommend the Council apologise to Ms X for not following its published appeals process and make a payment to recognise the uncertainty caused. We also recommend the Council remind staff dealing with transport appeals of the importance of following its published policy.