LGO crapness continues..........

[inappropriatelyemployed]

Over the last two years, I have become well used to the sheer crapness of the LGO but this really takes the biscuit.

The LGO, through their lovely lawyers Browne Jacobson, have stated very clearly that the LGO believes, where the courts do not, that there is a difference in law between 'arranging' provision and 'delivering' it so that it is perfectly ok for children with SEN to be without provision for several months - not because the LA didn't have a therapist, or someone was ill, just as a matter of routine with no explanation sought for it.

Also, despite the fact that the SEN COP states at para 8.109 that LAs must ?arrange the special educational provision...from the date on which the statement is made?, the LGO says this doesn't really mean that and that although the duty is absolute, delay is fine.

Seriously.

Anyway, given this tosh, we decided to ask for a case review and make a formal complaint about the conduct of this matter before proceeding down the JR route. I have additional evidence, my MP has made a complaint himself about the way they dealt with his evidence and we have had three provisional views and two final decisions in this case over two years. It took them 18 months to find maladministration on the facts they had had before them all along.

So solicitor writes to their lawyers and asks for details about the time frame to do so. I ask for time to make submissions. This is agreed in writing.

Then, before we can do anything, cue a letter today closing my file today! Says basically, we know you are going to complain about the failing to arrange as you keep banging on about the Education Act, but we don't agree with you so we're closing your file. Fuck off!

WTF Seriously, this is an Assistant Ombudsman. I am livid. What a fucking disgrace.

You know where this is heading though? Vexatious complainant - right. Perfect tactic. Stonewall, prevaricate, refuse to engage and then silence the person pursuing you.

Yes.

To both your posts.

But, - do they have a vexatious policy?

They'll write a vexatious policy if need be.

Yes they have a persistent and unreasonable complainant policy and guidance on such policies for LAs which they refuse to apply.

Perhaps we could do a FOIA request on the LGO's position on failing to arrange and any guidance received from lawyers on it.

Any takers for FOI requests?

Of course. I'm happy to make a stab at it myself but if you want precise wording it might be better if you PM/Email me with a draft.

Will do buddy - thanks!

Nothing useful to add but just wanted to show support.

This is horrific - talk about closing ranks!

When my case is finally over, I had intended on complaining to, amongst others, the LGO. But after reading this, it would seem that would be totally pointless.

I was reading through the 'what do they know' pages and came across this FOI request which resulted in the information that

37.2% of investigators and assistant ombudsmen are ex-council

50.5% are not ex councilors.

(Not sure what happened to the missing 12.3% - I expect they declined to answer.)

So the LAs are effectively policing themselves with their mates and ex-colleagues within the LGO!

Bizarre that they missed out 12.3%!

I can't get my head around what's happened actually. It is just so unspeakably low life to have an Asst ombudsman act like this - no doubt on instructions from lawyers. But this is not a corporation - it's a public body. Shocking.

Can you imagine if the police force did the same thing?

I would imagine that most of the missing 12.3% are ex-council but either didn't answer specifically what-ever questionnaire/database/survey/new-joiner-form used to gather this information; or answered so obscurely that their answer could only go into the 'unknown' category.

With these figures, I think we can safely assume that the LGO is in bed with the LAs. I notice that on the 'What do they know' link I gave above, there is an annotation with the name of the same assistant ombudsman's name you have. I wonder what her background is?

It really is a disgrace. Who the hell can you complain to!

I have mixed feelings about them, they actually awarded me financial compensation when LEA refused to put in provision a couple years back, what they then refused to accept was the second part to my complaint which was more shocking than the first part, but they knew this would open a huge can of worms for the LEA so started doing some really crazy things and odd decisions.

the school and LEA are behaving worse now so would like to think that given they told the LEA off for a lesser offence first time round for the LEA to have now gone back and done the exact same thing over a longer period of time and made no attempt to remedy the issue, would result in them giving them what for again, however I know exactly how this system works so I will not be holding my breath!

The AO I found was more of a git than the investigator as its all about closing ranks and sticking up for each other even if initial decision was flawed from top to bottom

Oh, I've just answered my own question with this link here

It'll come as no surprise that she is an ex-council officer (and with very interesting research areas for her academic dissertations). Hoooo hummm

Indeed. She is actually the Ombudsman - or one them. She didn't deal with my case but my MP wrote directly to her about it. As far as I know, she never even responded.

This is quite shocking in itself but on the back of last year's vote of no confidence by the House of Commons Select Committee it is startling.

Hoxton I think they choose the path of least resistance and get out of legitimate complaints as quickly as they can. Bear in mind LAs have very deep pockets and can sue to get what they want.

Well I've always said that Birmingham University should be blown up!

But remember, Lord Vader, Aniekin Skywalker he once was.

Very wise Yoda.

I think it is the fact that I have been deprived of my chance to say how their crapness has affected me and list all their many incompetences that upsets me so much.

They would have ignored it anyway but I would have got a chance to say how the investigator lied and suggested I was copying other people in to her emails when I was not and she could produce no evidence of this (suggesting I was being vexatious with her too), how the council have not changed their vexatious policy as the LGO claim, how the original investigator told me I was being premature in my complaint and dismissed me out of hand when my sons provision was still not in place and she hadn't bothered to check, how it took me three provisional views and 18 months for them to accept maladministration, how they withdrew their final decision in September when we sent a JR letter to lawyers and then sent a new letter 6 months later with no discernible changes etc etc

You can still write to them (copying in others) saying just that. They won't respond to YOU, but that doesn't mean that they definitely won't have to respond to someone (depending on who you copy in of course).

Who would you copy in though? I will run all this past my solicitor when she gets back to me. I hate waiting for responses,

Have been tweeting which is quite cathartic!

Lord McNally?

www.justice.gov.uk/about/moj/our-ministers These people?

I think they'd just say its an independent body blah bla. Could do with some decent media contacts.

Irrespective of the merits of the case, closing a file when they'd promised I writing to receive representations from me and ignoring an MPs letter is beyond the pale

Yes. So that is what you could write to them about. Not the ins and outs, but the particular issue about closing your file at this time.

Who's regulating this 'independent body'? Who gets to define it as independent?