Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a review of an Education Health and Care Plan. This is because delays and poor communication have not caused a significant enough injustice to the complainant and the contents of the plan has been appealed to a tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about how the Council dealt with a review of her child’s Education Health and Care Plan. Mrs X says there were delays issuing a final EHC Plan following a review, that communication with her was poor during this process and about the contents of the final EHC Plan.

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 injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

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 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.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council reviewed Mr X’s child’s EHC Plan on 17 July 2023. To comply with the relevant SEN regulations, the Council had to:

• Complete the review process by 15 February 2024. This is because Mr X’s children are moving between school phases.
• Issue the revised EHC Plans 12 weeks after the reviews, so by 9 October.

8. The Council failed to meet the 12-week deadline. But the Council did issue a final revised EHC Plan by 15 February. So, while there was some fault by the Council, the injustice caused by the delay and poor communication is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.
9. Mrs X has used her right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal. This places the contents of the EHC Plan outside of our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there any injustice is not significant to warrant our involvement. Also, the contents of the final EHC Plan has been appealed to the SEND Tribunal, placing this outside of our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman