Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of his daughter, Miss Y, that the Council failed to issue her with its decision not to provide an Education, Health and Care Plan. Mr X also complained the Council failed to take appropriate steps to ensure Miss Y had access to education while she was unable to attend an educational setting. Mr X says the Council’s actions negatively impacted Miss Y’s mental health and academic progress and placed a financial strain on the family. We found some fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to provide an apology and a financial remedy.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained on behalf of his daughter, Miss Y, that the Council failed to issue her with its decision not to provide an Education, Health and Care Plan. Mr X also complained the Council failed to take appropriate steps to ensure Miss Y had access to education while she was unable to attend an educational setting. Mr X says the Council’s actions negatively impacted Miss Y’s mental health and academic progress and limited her future options. He says the Council’s failures also placed a significant financial strain on the family. He would like the Council to provide an apology and a financial remedy to recognise the impact on the family.
2. Mr X also complained:
1. the Council did not provide alternative educational provision for Miss Y when she was unable to attend school from October 2022.
2. about the Council’s decision not to issue Miss Y with an Education, Health and Care Plan.
3. the Council did not trigger an Education, Health and Care needs assessment as a result of Y’s extended absence from school.
4. the Council delayed issuing an Education, Health and Care Plan following the Tribunal’s decision in January 2026.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. 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)
5. 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)
6. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the Tribunal in this decision statement.
7. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
8. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
9. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

10. I have exercised discretion to investigate the complaint referred to in paragraph one for the period June 2024 (when the Council made its decision to not issue an Education, Health and Care Plan) to March 2025 (when the Council issued its final complaint response).
11. I have not investigated the complaints referred to in paragraph two because:
1. The complaint about alternative educational provision dating back to October 2022 is late. There are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate back to this date.
2. Mr X/Miss Y appealed to the Tribunal about the Council’s decision not to issue Miss Y with an Education, Health and Care Plan.
3. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
4. The complaint about delays following the Tribunal’s decision in January 2026 was not part of the Council’s consideration of Mr X’s initial complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

12. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
13. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
14. 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

What I found

Education, Health and Care Plans

15. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them.
16. Statutory guidance ‘Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years’ (‘the Code’) sets out the process for carrying out EHC assessments and producing EHC Plans. The guidance is based on the Children and Families Act 2014 and the SEN Regulations 2014. It includes the following: 
• Where the council receives a request for an EHC needs assessment it must decide whether to agree to the assessment and send its decision to the parent of the child or the young person within six weeks. 
• If a local authority decides, following an EHC needs assessment, not to issue an EHC Plan, it must inform the child’s parent or the young person within a maximum of 16 weeks from the request for an EHC needs assessment.
17. There is a right of appeal to the Tribunal against a council’s decision that it is not necessary to issue an EHC Plan following an assessment.

Participation of young people in education, employment or training

18. Statutory guidance says councils have broad duties to encourage, enable and assist young people to participate in education or training. These are:
• To secure sufficient suitable education and training provision for all young people in their area who are over compulsory school age but under 19, or aged 19 to 25 and for whom an EHC Plan is maintained. This is a duty under the Education Act 1996. To fulfil this, councils need to have a strategic overview of the provision available in their area and to identify and resolve gaps in provision.
• To make available to all young people aged 13-19, and to those between 20 and 25 with special educational needs and disabilities, support that will encourage, enable or assist them to participate in education or training under section 68 of the Education and Skills Act 2008.
19. Tracking young people’s participation is a key element of these duties. Councils are required to collect information about young people so that those who are not participating or are not in education or training (NEET), can be identified and given support to re-engage. Robust tracking also provides the Council with information that will help to ensure that suitable education and training provision is available and that resources can be targeted effectively.
20. Council’s must make arrangements, (maintain a tracking system) to identify 16 and 17 year olds who are not participating in education or training. Putting in place robust arrangements to identify young people who are not engaged in education or training or who have left provision enables councils to offer support as soon as possible.

Background

21. Mr X’s daughter, Miss Y, lives in the Council’s area but was enrolled at a school in another council’s area.
22. In July 2023, Miss Y received a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD).
23. In February 2024, Mr X asked the Council to carry out an EHC needs assessment for Miss Y. Mr X told the Council Miss Y attended an online school platform (School A) at that time. He said this was because Miss Y was unable to participate in a classroom setting due to her diagnosis of ASD.
24. The Council completed an EHC needs assessment and on 31 May 2024, decided it was not necessary to issue an EHC Plan for Miss Y.

What happened

25. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
26. On 4 June 2024, the Council issued its decision letter to School A, stating its decision that it was not necessary to issue an EHC Plan.
27. Mr X says he became aware of the Council’s decision in mid-November 2024.
28. On 3 January 2025, Mr X complained to the Council. He complained:
• The Council had made no alternative educational provision for Miss Y since she had been unable to attend a school setting from October 2022.
• The Council’s decision not to issue an EHC Plan disregarded Miss Y’s special educational needs and left her without a viable pathway to education.
• The Council had failed to notify him of its decision following the EHC needs assessment.
• The Council’s failures had caused a significant emotional and financial impact on the family.
• The Council failed to trigger an EHC needs assessment despite Miss Y’s extended absence from school.
29. Shortly after, Mr X appealed to the Tribunal regarding the Council’s decision not to issue an EHC Plan for Miss Y.
30. The Council provided its complaint response on 31 January 2025. It said its Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) team only became aware of Miss Y in February 2024 when Mr X requested the EHC needs assessment. The Council acknowledged Mr X’s appeal to the Tribunal and said the appeal process was the appropriate route for the outcome of Miss Y’s case. Regarding the issuance of the decision letter, the Council said it had not seen any emails to Mr X regarding this. The Council apologised for not sending the letter. The Council acknowledged Mr X’s concerns about Miss Y’s extended period of absence from school without any intervention, but said this appeared to be frustration with the school rather than with the SEND team.
31. Mr X escalated his complaint on 4 February 2025 as he considered the Council had failed to address his key concerns. He said the Council had a duty to arrange alternative provision while Miss Y was unable to attend a formal school setting and said the family were forced to finance her education themselves at significant personal cost. Mr X said the Council’s response attempted to shift responsibility onto the school.
32. The Council provided its final complaint response on 25 March 2025. It said Miss Y had attended school in another local authority’s area and it therefore had no attendance records to view. The Council said it was not informed of Miss Y’s absence; it said the other local authority was responsible for triggering any legal intervention for poor attendance and support for the school. Regarding the decision letter, the Council acknowledged it had not sent this to Mr X. It said its process was to send decisions by email or post to parents, as well as to the educational setting, and it apologised for not following this process. The Council apologised that Mr X’s experience had resulted in financial implications but stated it would not offer any compensation.
33. Mr X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response and brought the complaint to the Ombudsman.

Analysis – failure to issue the decision letter

34. Mr X says he did not receive the Council’s letter regarding its decision not to issue an EHC Plan for Miss Y. This decision was made in late May/early June 2024. Mr X says he became aware of the decision in November 2024.
35. The Council says it has no evidence to indicate it sent the decision letter to Mr X via email in June 2024 and no evidence of a request to print the letter. It says the decision letter was not sent as recorded post, and the Council assumes the letter was either not sent or it was lost in the post. The Council says it has no evidence to state what happened.
36. I acknowledge the Council’s response to my enquiries, but also acknowledge its complaint response to Mr X, which acknowledged the Council did not send the letter. Whilst the Council states it has no evidence to state what happened, it is more likely than not the Council did not send the decision letter to Mr X in June 2024. This is because the Council has no record of issuing the letter by email or post, and Mr X says he did not receive it. In addition, the Council has previously acknowledged it did not send the letter. The failure to issue the decision letter is not in accordance with the Code and is fault.
37. The injustice to Miss Y is the frustration and uncertainty at not being notified of the Council’s decision. In addition, the delay in providing the Council’s decision delayed Miss Y and/or Mr X’s right of appeal to the Tribunal. I acknowledge however that Mr X has since successfully appealed the Council’s decision. Mr X says had the Council communicated its decision correctly in June 2024, the appeal process would have commenced considerably earlier. He says the Council’s failure prolonged a period in which Miss Y’s SEN remained formally unrecognised and unsupported.
38. The Council says it now sends all post via recorded delivery to ensure all documents are tracked and to ensure the Council retains evidence of postage. It says it has also put in place measures to send documents via email. I acknowledge the Council’s comments and consider it is positive it has taken steps to avoid a reoccurrence of this issue.

Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to ensure Miss Y had access to education

39. The Council says it is required to track, support and intervene with all young people aged 16 to 18 (in school years 12 and 13), and for all those with an EHC Plan up to the age of 24, or until the plan ceases. The Council says it takes its responsibilities in relation to tracking and supporting young people very seriously, in particular, when they have SEND needs or are vulnerable.
40. The Council says its duties end when young people without those needs turn 18 (at the end of Year 13). It says there is no indication the Council has breached that duty.
41. The Council says Miss Y is aged 18 and is not flagged as having an EHC Plan. It says the Council would be tracking her if there was any indication that an EHC Plan was in place. It says the Council had complete information about Miss Y up to the end of Year 13, in line with its statutory duties.
42. I acknowledge the Council’s comments and acknowledge that Miss Y turned 18 in July 2025. The Council was therefore required to ‘track, support and intervene’ with Miss Y as a young person for the period covered by this investigation.
43. For the school years 12 and 13, the Council’s records show it recorded Miss Y’s school, provider or employer as ‘Other (unlisted) School/College Elsewhere’. This accords with Mr X’s explanation that Miss Y was studying online for her A levels for the period in question.
44. The Council’s records show it tracked whether Miss Y was in education or employment until she turned 18, recording Miss Y to be at an unlisted school or college. The Council therefore recorded Miss Y as being in education, and not NEET. As a result, the Council did not fail to ensure Miss Y had access to education and is therefore not at fault regarding this aspect of the complaint.

Back to top

Action

45. To address the injustice identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within one month of the final decision:
1. Provide an apology to Mr X and Miss Y for the fault identified, and
2. Make a symbolic payment of £200 for the benefit of Miss Y in recognition of the frustration and uncertainty caused, and the delayed appeal rights.
46. The Council has also agreed to take the additional following action within three months of the final decision:
1. Review the Council’s procedure for issuing Education, Health and Care Plan decision letters to ensure the steps taken by the Council as specified in its enquiry response, (sending all relevant post via recorded delivery and seeking consent from service users to send non-encrypted documents if required) are implemented into the Council’s process.
47. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

48. I have found fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take the above actions to remedy the injustice and I have therefore concluded my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman