Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to ensure alternative provision was available to Child Y when they were permanently excluded, and again when their placement broke down. This meant Child Y was without education for significant periods of time. The Council has agreed to apologise and make financial payments in recognition of distress.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council has failed to arrange suitable, accessible alternative provision for her child. Miss X says this caused her child to be out of education for longer than necessary. Miss X also complains the Council upheld her complaint but failed to consider any remedies for the injustice caused to her and her son.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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 future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. 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

6. The Ombudsman does not usually consider complaints about issues older then 12 months. Child Y, was permanently excluded in February 2024 but Miss X did not bring her complaint to the Ombudsman until October 2025. However, I am exercising discretion to consider actions dating back to the point of exclusion in February 2024. This is because the Council’s delayed actions in responding to her complaints and its actions in the complaint response are directly linked to events of Child Y being excluded.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. I invited Miss X and the Council to comment on my draft decision, and I considered any comments received.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

Section 19 duty

9. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that the council must arrange suitable alternative educational provision when it finds that a child is unable to attend school because of a permanent exclusion, an illness, or for any other reason which make the school inaccessible to the child. The alternative educational provision must be suitable to the child’s age, ability and aptitude, and any special educational needs they have.

Reviewing EHC Plans

10. The council must arrange for the EHC Plan to be reviewed at least once a year to make sure it is up to date. The council must complete the review within 12 months of the first EHC Plan and within 12 months of any later reviews. The annual review begins with consulting the child’s parents or the young person and the educational placement. A review meeting must then take place. Following the review meeting the council must issue a decision to either amend, maintain or cease to maintain the EHC Plan. This must happen within four weeks of the meeting. (Section 20(10) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.176) 

What happened

11. Miss X has a child, Child Y, with an EHCP maintained by the Council.
12. Child Y was permanently excluded from school in February 2024.
13. The Council sent consultation documents to alternative provision providers in July 2024. It found a provider and agreed tuition from 9th September 2024.
14. The alternative provision started on 9th September 2024 and was in place until 25th October 2024 when the placement broke down. The Council sourced further alternative provision which started from 12th November 2024.
15. This alternative provision ended in May 2025 following a placement breakdown.
16. Miss X complained to the Council. In her complaint she said

• The Council had taken too long to arrange alternative provision for Child Y following his permanent exclusion from school.
• The Council had arranged multiple placements that had failed, leaving Child Y without provision.
• The Council had failed to review Child Y’s EHCP since 2023, and
• Miss X constantly had to chase staff members and seek updates.

17. The Council’s final response in August 2025 said

• The Council recognised that alternative provision was not put in place in a timely manner following Child Y’s exclusion. It said this was because of several changes in the assigned officer, which meant communication sometimes was not responded to or actions not carried out.
• The Council had carried out an annual review, but the paperwork was not completed which led to significant delays in consulting for specialist provision for Child Y.
• Alternative provision was in place again from April 2025, but this had ended in July 2025, and the Council was searching for a specialist placement for Child Y.
• The Council apologised for the missed provision, and for the handling of the case. It set out several service improvements it would take to address the issue.

18. Child Y began a new placement from April 2026.

Analysis

Alternative provision

19. The Ombudsman asked the Council to clarify what alternative provision was available Child Y, and overall, how long Child Y was without provision. The Council told the Ombudsman that it accepts there were delays in arranging alternative provision, which led to three terms of missed provision.
20. The Council later said to the Ombudsman there was two terms of lost provision.
21. I have reviewed the documents sent by the Council. There is fault by the Council in failing to complete the EHCP review paperwork and issue a decision, which delayed the Council being able to consult with specialist provisions. There was also fault by the Council in failing to respond to Miss X and delaying sourcing alternative provision. The Council has apologised for this in its complaint response, however, it remains that Child Y should still have been receiving provision during this time.
22. The documents from the Council and its chronology provided to the Ombudsman show that Child Y was without provision for almost five terms. I have calculated this based on the following

• Child Y was permanently excluded in February 2024, but no alternative provision was in place until September 2024. This equates to almost two terms.
• Child Y was without provision for three weeks between October 2024 and November 2024 following a placement breakdown.
• Child Y’s provision ended due to placement breakdown in May 2025, however, no new provision was in place until 27th April 2026. This equates to three terms.

23. When the Council sent its final complaint response, and Miss X complained to the Ombudsman, Child Y was still out of education. We would not usually consider issues arising past the point of complaint, however, in this case, Child X remained out of school and experiencing an injustice. The Council has provided some evidence it was seeking a specialist placement, but that this was delayed by the failure to complete the EHCP paperwork. It has not shown any evidence that it further alternative provision was in place whilst it tried to obtain the specialist placement. Therefore, the previous fault by the Council of failing to arrange suitable provision continued until Child Y began their placement in April 2026.
24. In response to my draft decision, the Council accepted that it was at fault for failing to arrange provision for Child Y after the final complaint response was issued. I have therefore included a remedy for this time period, as well as the original fault.
25. In response to my draft decision, Miss X said that what little provision was in place was not suitable for Child Y and that is why the placements broke down. I am satisfied that the Council has provided evidence to show that when it arranged alternative provision, it did so with Child Y’s needs in mind, with providers who agreed they could meet Child Y’s needs. I am therefore satisfied with how the Council decided Child Y’s placements were suitable.

Complaint handling

26. The Council has accepted that it did not recognise the impact of its maladministration on Miss X during the complaint handling. The Council has not been able to provide a reason for failing to recognise and remedy this during the complaints process. This was fault by the Council and it should have considered a financial remedy in recognition of the missed provision and distress caused.
27. The Council has suggested £900 per term, and a £600 distress payment for Miss X. We do not consider the suggested Council’s payment for loss of education reflects the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, which suggests between £900 and £2400 for loss of education. I have therefore recommended £2000 per term as Child Y had special educational needs with an EHCP that identified support, was in a transitionary stage of their education, and received very little education.

Back to top

Action

28. Within four weeks the Council has agreed to

• Write to Miss X and apologise for the fault identified.
• Pay Miss X £6000 in recognition of the missed provision. This is calculated at £2000 per term for three terms of lost provision. This payment recognises the education Child Y missed, and the impact it had on the whole family.
• Pay Miss X a further £4000 as it has accepted that these faults also meant that Child Y went without education for another two terms after the complaint response was issued from the period of August 2025 until April 2026.

29. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

30. I find fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman