East Sussex County Council (24 005 451)

Category : Education > Special educational needs

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 03 Sep 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the education placements the Council named in his child’s Education, Health, and Care Plan(s). Mr X had a right of appeal about these decisions. Nor will we investigate the other parts of his complaint because they are either late, or the Council has already satisfactorily addressed them.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complained the Council did not do enough to support his child (G), from 2021 onwards, when they were experiencing difficulties with accessing education. He also complained about the education placements the Council named in G’s Education, Health, and Care (EHC) Plans after the last two EHC reviews.
  2. Mr X said this has had a significant impact on G’s wellbeing and he now wants the Council to name a different placement.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
  3. 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)
  4. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the SEND Tribunal in this decision statement.
  5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X complained the Council should have done more to support G’s school from 2021 onwards, to help them access their education, when they needed additional supervision to be in school. We won’t investigate this, because it is a late complaint and there are no good reasons why Mr X could not have complained about these issues at the time.
  2. The Council issued a final EHC Plan in July 2023 and named Placement A. Mr X said this was an unsuitable placement and G was ultimately not able to attend. In December 2023, the Council carried out an EHC review, and in April 2024, it issued another EHC Plan, naming Placement B. Mr X said this too was unsuitable and G was not able to attend.
  3. We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to name Placements A and B. Mr X had a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal about these decisions, and it would be reasonable to expect him to have used this appeal right. In any case, we cannot direct changes to an EHC Plan including the name of the educational placement. Only the SEND Tribunal or the Council can do this.
  4. The Council investigated Mr X’s complaint and accepted it had delayed finalising G’s EHC Plan after the EHC review in December. It upheld his complaint, acknowledged this caused Mr X frustration and apologised. This is a satisfactory response to Mr X’s complaint about this aspect.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decisions on which education placements it named in G’s EHC Plan. Mr X had a right of appeal, and it would have been reasonable for him to use this. Nor will we investigate the remaining parts of Mr X’s complaint for the reasons outlined.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings