Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council carried out an Education Health and Care needs assessment. This is because the complainant used their right of appeal to a tribunal against the Council’s original decision not to carry out an assessment. Any injustice caused by the Council’s delay in issuing a final plan is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mrs X, complains about how the Council deal with her request for an Education Health and Care (EHC) assessment for her child. Mrs X says the Council decided not to carry out an assessment, despite having sufficient evidence that her child had Special Educational Needs (SEN). She says the Council then delayed issuing a final ECH plan. Mrs X says the Council has failed to provide adequate support to her child.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council decided not to carry out an EHC needs assessment for Mrs X’s child. Mrs X appealed this decision, and the Council conceded the appeal in late May. In August, Mrs X complained that the Council had delayed issuing a final EHC plan. The Council issued a draft EHC plan in Mid-August followed by a final EHC plan in early September.
8. I cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s original decision not to carry out an EHC needs assessment for her child. This is because Mrs X used her right of appeal against this decision to the SEND Tribunal, which places it outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
9. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council delayed issuing an EHC plan. The Council had 14 weeks from the date when it decided to conceded Mrs X’s appeal to issue a final plan. Whilst the Council did issue the EHC plan some six days late, I do not consider that this delay is long enough to have caused a significant enough injustice to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because she appealed to a tribunal and any delay in issuing a final EHC plan did not cause a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman