Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the content of an Education, Health, and Care (EHC) Plan because Mrs X has a right of appeal to a Tribunal that it is reasonable for her to use.

The complaint

1. Mrs X is unhappy:
1. her child’s final EHC Plan did not include the amendments she asked for;
2. about the education setting named on the EHC plan;
3. some provision in Section F of the plan was removed without reason; and
4. about the Council’s complaint handling and how it communicated with her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This document sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them. The EHC Plan is set out in sections. We cannot direct changes to the sections about their needs, education, or the name of the educational placement. Only the tribunal or the council can do this.

7. It is not good use of public resources to investigate complaint handling, including how the Council communicated with Mrs X, if we are unable to investigate the substantive matter Mrs X complains of.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her child’s EHC Plan because she has a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal it would be reasonable for her to use.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman