Summary: We upheld Mr X’s complaints about delays in the Education, Health and Care needs assessment of his child and the Council’s poor communication. This is because the Council upheld Mr X’s complaints and provided a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about delays in the Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment process regarding his child, Y. Mr X also complained about the Council’s poor communication.
2. Mr X said the matter caused him distress, uncertainty, and delayed his right to appeal to the SEND Tribunal about the content of Y’s EHC Plan.
3. Mr X wants the Council to reimburse his legal fees for a solicitor he instructed to progress the matter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
5. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Delay in EHC Process

8. We upheld Mr X’s complaints about delays in the EHC needs assessment process.
9. This is because the Council accepted it delayed completing Y’s EHC Plan by one month. It apologised for the delay and offered Mr X a £100 symbolic payment to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty caused by the delay. This is in line with our Guidance on Remedies. An investigation by the Ombudsman into this matter would therefore not be proportionate.

Poor communication

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s poor communication.
11. In its complaint response, the Council accepted its communication was not adequate. It apologised, explained steps it had taken to improve the service, and offered Mr X a further £100 symbolic payment to acknowledge his frustration and time and trouble. This is in line with our Guidance on Remedies.
12. As part of another recent investigation the Ombudsman requested evidence of the Council’s action plans to improve its SEND services and the impact of the changes it has made. This includes how its services communicate with service users.
13. Consequently, an investigation by the Ombudsman into this matter would not be proportionate.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We upheld this complaint because the Council upheld Mr X’s complaints and provided a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman