Council ordered to pay mum £4,700 over child’s missed education
The mum complained to the Ombudsman that the county council had not provided her child with suitable education when they were out of school
A child was left with no education at a “critical stage” of their schooling following council failings.
Cambridgeshire County Council has been ordered to pay a mum £4,700 in recognition of their child’s missed education and the “avoidable distress” caused by the situation.
The county council said it has apologised to the family and had complied with the recommendations made by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, which upheld the mother’s complaint.
The mum complained to the Ombudsman that the county council had not provided her child with suitable education when they were out of school, and delayed carrying out an Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment.
The report published by the Ombudsman said the child, referred to as Y, started mainstream secondary school in September 2023, but has stopped attending by November.
The Ombudsman said Y’s mum, referred to in the report as Ms X, had said Y found it difficult to attend school and “would have meltdowns and hurt themselves”.
Ms X said these issues had started in September, but had gradually gotten worse until Y stopped going to school completely in November.
The report recognised that Y’s school did try to put in place some adjustments for them, but Ms X said Y was not able to “cope physically” with going to school.
In January 2024 Ms X asked the county council to carry out an EHC needs assessment for Y.
EHC plans are used to set out the needs a child might have and what additional support should be offered to meet those needs.
In March 2024 the county council agreed to carry out an EHC assessment for Y, but by May Ms X complained to the authority as she had not heard anything further about the assessment.
The county council said at the time that it had not received advice from an educational psychologist yet due to national shortages, and explained that once it had this advice it would put Y’s case to a placement panel to decide whether a EHC Plan should be issued.
Ms X pursued the complaint and the county council ultimately recognised that Y had been entitled to alternative education from December 14, 2023, and upheld Ms X’s complaint.
It also upheld her complaint over the delays faced around the EHC needs assessment.
Y was offered alternative provision within their school in September 2024, and also had an assessment from an education psychologist the same month.
In December 2024 it was decided that Y would not be issued with an EHC Plan; this decision has been appealed by Ms X.
The Ombudsman said as the county council decided to not issue an EHC Plan for Y that it should have told Ms X this within 16 weeks of her initial request.
The decision was instead issued seven months late, which the Ombudsman said caused injustice to Ms X as it delayed her ability to challenge the decision by seven months.
The Ombudsman said it was “welcomed” that the county council recognised it had failed to put in place alternative education for Y in mid-December when it should have done.
However, the Ombudsman said the authority had not offered a remedy for the injustice this caused.
The report said: “As Y was not at school and did not have any alternative provision in place they received no education for this period. This is an injustice to Y.”
The Ombudsman also highlighted that Y was in Year Seven at the time and said this was a “critical stage of their education”.
The county council has been told to apologise to Ms X for its faults and to pay her £700 in recognition of the “avoidable distress caused by the delays in deciding whether to issue Y with an EHC Plan”.
The authority was also ordered to pay Ms X £4,000 in recognition of the education Y lost between December 2023 and July 2024.
In the Ombudsman report it added: “Normally we would make a service improvement recommendation for the council.
“In another recent complaint we investigated the council agreed to put in place measures to ensure it properly considered whether to provide alternative education and kept this under review.
“The council also agreed in its final complaint response to Ms X that it would put in place improvements to its service to address the delays.
“Because of this, it is right to give the council time to put these changes into place to improve its service.”
A spokesperson for the county council said: “We take each individual complaint very seriously, which is why we have apologised to the family and complied with all of the Ombudsman’s recommendations, including making a payment of £4,700 in recognition of distress caused and loss of appropriate education.”
The county council spokesperson added that the demand for SEND services was increasing at an “unprecedented rate” and that the authority was “working hard to manage this”, while also implementing improvements to its services.
They said: “We also await the government’s proposals for national reforms to the SEND system with interest, which are anticipated in the autumn.
“These national reforms need to address the underlying and systemic policy, regulatory and financial issues that impact SEND services here in Cambridgeshire and elsewhere.”