Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council handled her son’s Education, Health and Care Plan process. We have found fault with the Council for failing to meet statutory timescales which delayed Mrs X’s right of appeal and caused Mrs X and her son distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice.

The complaint

24. Mrs X complained on behalf of her son that the Council failed to follow up his 2023 annual review of his EHC Plan or carry out a timely annual review in 2024. Mrs X said her son missed out on education and support as a result of the Council’s failure.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

25. 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)
26. 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)
27. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the Tribunal in this decision statement.
28. 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(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

29. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.

30. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

31. 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.
32. 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. The process is only complete when the council issues its decision to amend, maintain or discontinue 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)
33. Where the council proposes to amend an EHC Plan, the law says it must send the child’s parent or the young person a copy of the existing (non-amended) Plan and an accompanying notice providing details of the proposed amendments, including copies of any evidence to support the proposed changes. (Section 22(2) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.194). Case law sets out this should happen within four weeks of the date of the review meeting. Case law also found councils must issue the final amended EHC Plan within a further eight weeks.

What happened

34. Mrs X’s son, Y has SEN and an EHC Plan. Following an annual review in 2023, the Council issued a draft amended EHC Plan in May 2023. Mrs X complained to the Council in September 2023 that the Plan did not name an education setting, the Council had not contacted her about the changes she suggested, and the Council had not finalised the Plan, so she had no right to appeal.
35. The Council said that it understood that Y did not want to pursue further education, and he had been offered job opportunities that he declined. It acknowledged Mrs X’s concerns about the lack of a named placement.
36. In November, the Council met with Mrs X where she requested an alternative education placement for Y. Mrs X escalated her complaint in January 2024 as the Council had not secured the placement or finalised Y’s EHC Plan.
37. Mrs X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman in August 2024.

Update

38. In October, the Council responded to Mrs X’s stage 2 escalation. It apologised for the delays and agreed to carry out an annual review as soon as possible. It offered a £1000 symbolic payment in recognition of the delays. Mrs X accepted this payment.
39. The Council issued Y’s final amended EHC Plan in April 2025.

My findings

40. The Council should have issued a final amended EHC Plan 12 weeks after the annual review in 2023. It did not issue it until April 2025, nearly 2 years later. This was fault. This delayed Mrs X’s appeal rights and caused uncertainty and distress for Y and Mrs X.
41. The Council should have reviewed Y’s EHC Plan within 12 months of the 2023 review. The Council did not review Y’s EHC Plan at all in 2024. This was fault which could have resulted in Y’s EHC Plan being out of date and the provision inappropriate.
42. I cannot say that the delays caused Y to miss out on education or SEN provision. However, Mrs X said that Y was happy to continue education in 2023 when the annual review took place. However, by April 2025 when he received his final amended EHC Plan, he was no longer interested.
43. The Council apologised for the delays in issuing the amended final EHC Plan, carrying out an annual review and responding to Mrs X’s complaint. It explained this was due to staff vacancies, absences and the increase in EHC needs assessments. It said it has now undertaken substantial recruitment to ensure there is appropriate resource. This is a positive outcome.
44. The Council’s paid £1,000 to acknowledge the delays, Mrs X’s frustrated right of appeal, and the avoidable frustrations encountered by both Mrs X and Y. This was in line with our guidance on remedies.
45. Following the stage 2 response in October 2024, it took a further 6 months to issue a final amended Plan and the Council still have not carried out the delayed annual review. The Council has agreed to apologise for the continued delays, pay Mrs X a further £500 in recognition of the frustration this caused, and carry out a transition review to determine the next steps for Y as he transitions from children’s to adult’s services.

Back to top

Agreed action

46. Within 4 weeks of my decision, the Council has agreed to:
4. Apologise to Mrs X for the continued delays issuing Y’s EHC Plan;
5. Pay Mrs X £500 in recognition of the frustration caused by the delays;
47. Within 8 weeks of my decision, the Council has agreed to:
4. Provide evidence of the staff training that has taken place to improve record keeping to prevent delays when case workers change roles.
5. Arrange a transition review with Mrs X and Y to include representatives from family services and adult community services to discuss Y’s future plans;
48. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

49. I have found the Council at fault for delays in the EHC Plan review process which caused Mrs X and Y distress and delayed Mrs X’s appeal rights. The Council has agreed to remedy Mrs X’s and Y’s injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman