Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alleged failure to deliver speech and language therapy. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. If the complainant wanted to challenge the content of their daughter’s Education, Health and Care Plan, it was reasonable for them to use their appeal rights.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complained the Council failed to deliver direct speech and language therapy to her daughter (Y) who has an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan). Mrs X wants compensation and the therapy reinstating.

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
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

3. 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)
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. In its responses to Mrs X’s complaint, the Council set out the process it had followed to review Y’s EHC Plan. There had been an annual review in January 2023 with an EHC Plan issued in May. There had been a further annual review in December 2023, with an EHC Plan issued in February 2024. None of the final EHC Plans contained direct speech and language therapy. The Council said Mrs X had provided an amended copy of an EHC Plan with the therapy included, but it had no legal status. The Council said it had not delivered the therapy as it was not in the EHC Plan – nor was it in the previous version.
8. We will not start an investigation into Mrs X’s complaint.
9. The Council has a duty to ensure the content of an EHC Plan is delivered. As direct speech and language therapy was not in the EHC Plan, there is no evidence of fault by the Council.
10. If Mrs X was unhappy with the content of the EHC Plan, then it was reasonable for her to appeal to the SEND Tribunal. It is the mechanism established by Parliament for parents to challenge the content of an EHC Plan. It can decide if an EHC Plan should be amended, and an appeal could have given Mrs X the outcome she wanted. We have no powers to say what provision an EHC Plan should contain and so we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault, and it was reasonable for her to appeal to the SEND Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman