Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Education, Health and Care plan process for her child, Y, and the Council’s handling of her complaint. Part of the complaint is late, there is insufficient evidence of fault and we could not add to the Council’s response.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s actions related to her child, Y’s, Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan and the annual review process. She also complains about how the Council handled her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organization.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complained to the Council in December 2022. The complaint covered a range of issues related to Y’s EHC Plan and the annual review process including:
• The Council had failed to implement a Tribunal Order issued in July 2022;
• The Council was obstructing access to an Educational Psychologist as part of the annual review process, despite this being a statutory requirement.
7. In response to Ms X’s complaint, the Council has issued two responses at stage one and a final stage two response. I have carefully reviewed these responses. They respond to all points of complaint and there is no evidence of fault in the information provided about the Council’s statutory duties.
8. In relation to her main points of complaint, the Council is correct that there is no statutory requirement for an educational psychologist to be involved in EHC Plan annual reviews.
9. She also said the Council failed to instruct an Educational Psychologist until ordered by the Tribunal in 2022. Any complaint about the Council’s actions before 2022 is late. We also cannot investigate any matter that has already been considered by a tribunal.
10. Ms X also complained the Council discussed the possibility of changing Y’s named placement during an annual review, despite this being ordered by the Tribunal in July 2022. Regardless of any discussion, the Council confirmed Y’s named placement remained unchanged and in line with the Tribunal Order, so any discussion about this did not cause Y an injustice.
11. In relation to the complaint handling, Ms X complained that a Council director responded at stage one of the complaints procedure, rather than the service team. I do not consider this caused Ms X an injustice and so we will not investigate this.
12. The Council has appropriately considered and responded to her complaints. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation and we could not add to the Council’s response.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we could not add to the Council’s response and there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman