Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed issuing an Education Health and Care Plan. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint by offering to make a suitable payment to the complainant to remedy the injustice this cause. We will not investigate other matters because they are either made late or have been subject to an appeal to a tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about how the Council has dealt with her child, Y’s, education provision for the last four years. Mrs X says Y has been on a part time timetable and that the Council delayed issuing an Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended.
3. 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)
4. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
5. 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.
6. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council has dealt with Y’s provision for the last 4 years. This is because I see no good reason why a complaint could not have been made sooner.
10. The Council carried out an EHC needs assessment for Y and decided not to issue an EHC Plan. I cannot investigate the Council’s decision not to issue the EHC Plan because Mrs X used her right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal to challenge this decision.
11. The Council conceded Mrs X’s appeal in January, and agreed to issue an EHC Plan. However, there were delays and the Council did not issue a final EHC Plaun until early July.
12. If we were to investigate this complaint it is likely that we would find fault. This is because the Council delayed issuing a final EHC Plan after it conceded Mrs X’s appeal.
13. The delays have caused Mrs X distress in the form of frustration and uncertainty. Whilst the Council has apologised to Mrs X, I don’t consider that this fully remedies the injustice the delays have caused her.
14. I therefore recommended that the Council writes to Mrs X within one month to offer her a payment of £200 to remedy the distress this has caused her. To its credit, the Council agreed to my recommendation.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We have upheld Mrs X’s complaint. The Council has agreed to resolve the matter by providing a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman