Summary: Mr X complained that his young adult son (Y) had not received the provision in his Education, Health and Care Plan. There was fault. The Council did not keep under review whether Y had become able to access therapy and tuition again and delayed carrying out an annual review. Considering the way to move forward remedies the injustice to Y.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains for his young adult son, Y. Mr X says that Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan has not been implemented since 2013 and he wants the Council to pay to relocate his family back to London so Y can complete his education.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)
4. 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

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have not investigated events before November 2023. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended) Mr X made complaints to the Council in 2021 and 2023 but did not make a complaint to the Ombudsman at that time. I cannot see any reason to exercise discretion to go back prior to November 2023, this is 12 months before Mr X put in this complaint to the Ombudsman, as Mr X could have complained to the Ombudsman earlier.
6. I have investigated Mr X’s complaints until the date Mr X put in the complaint to the Ombudsman (in November 2024) that:
• A block of 12 Speech and Language therapy sessions promised in the Council’s official complaint response of April 2024 has not been provided.
• The Council has not been providing the Occupational Therapy in Section F of the EHC Plan from November 2023 onwards.
• The Council has not been providing the Cognitive Behavioural Therapy in Section F of the EHC Plan from November 2023 onwards.
• There has been a delay in carrying out the annual review of the EHC Plan and Y is getting no education,

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

9. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an 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. 
10. 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) 
11. The council has a duty to make sure the child or young person receives the special educational provision set out in section F of an EHC Plan (Section 42 Children and Families Act). The Courts have said the duty to arrange this provision is owed personally to the child and is non-delegable. This means if the council asks another organisation to make the provision and that organisation fails to do so, the council remains liable (R v London Borough of Harrow ex parte M [1997] ELR 62), (R v North Tyneside Borough Council [2010] EWCA Civ 135)  

Key facts

12. Y is a young adult with an EHC Plan. SEND tribunal decided the EHC Plan of February 2023 should name the setting as Special college, with interim online tutoring. The EHC Plan included:
• A block of 1:1 Speech and Language Therapy (one half an hour session a week for 12 weeks)
• A once a week Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) session delivered by a teaching assistant or teacher.
• A once a week program to explore how to manage sensory demands delivered by a teaching assistant or teacher, reviewed termly by an Occupational Therapist.
13. The report noted that ‘although online tutoring is currently meeting some of Y’s educational needs, it fails to provide the full extent of provision he requires to meet the needs outlined in Section B, in particular his communication and interaction and social, emotional, and mental health needs. Much of the support and opportunities Y requires cannot be provided through tuition and require access to professionals with a range of experiences and expertise, as well as peers’.
14. The Council consulted specialist colleges in February 2023. One college said it could meet Y’s needs but Mr X had told them that he did not want Y to go to that college.
15. From February 2023 the Council has funded 16 hours of tuition per week for Y.
16. The Council funded an Occupational Therapy assessment for Y in April 2023. This recommended a mix of indirect and direct OT.
17. Mr X made an official complaint to the Council. The Council replied in April 2024 that:
• There had been a delay arranging SALT provision. The Council apologised and said it would make arrangements for the provision.
• The Council said the OT report identified several needs and outcomes but the assessment showed that Y was not ready to engage with OT provision.
• The weekly CBT programme could not be put in place as Y was not attending an educational setting.
• The Council would arrange an annual review in the very near future to find a suitable specialist college placement.
18. The Council funded an assessment and 12, 30 minute sessions of SALT in April 2024.

My analysis

Speech and Language Therapy

19. The Council was at fault, as it delayed putting in place the SALT sessions in the EHC Plan. The Council apologised and put in the sessions in place when responding to Mr X’s official complaint. The Council has said ‘while the Council arranged for a block of sessions, not all sessions were delivered. Our understanding is the therapist was refused access to the property by the family on at least one occasion’.
20. As the Council remedied the injustice, by providing access to the SALT sessions I do not recommend a further remedy. I note that Y may not have received all the sessions, but they were funded and offered to Y.

Occupational Therapy

21. Y’s EHC Plan is written so he received indirect OT support while in specialist college. The assessment in April 2023 concluded that Y was not ready to engage with OT provision.
22. The Council has said that it has not received any updates on Y’s mental health so has not resumed the OT provision.
23. From the information I have, the Council has not monitored whether Y is ready to engage with OT provision. I do also accept that Mr X has not informed the Council that Y is ready to engage with OT. In addition, Y has not been able to engage with visits from a tutor and so I can see it is unlikely that he is ready to engage with direct OT provision. It was fault for the Council not to review whether OT provision could be restarted but this is unlikely to have caused injustice to Y and so no further remedy is needed.

Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

24. Y’s EHC Plan includes a weekly programme based on Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. The Council has said that this could not be delivered as Y was not attending an educational setting.
25. From the information I have, the Council has not monitored whether the CBT provision could be delivered outside of an educational setting. As Y has not been able to engage with a tutor I can see that it would be unlikely. But, it was fault for the Council not to review whether CBT provision could be restarted.

Tuition

26. The EHC Plan from tribunal named specialist college. The Council found a college which Mr X refused. Sixteen hours of tuition was put in place instead.
27. There is evidence that this was carried out from January 2023 until April 2024. The tutor has said that Mr X asked him to stop the tuition in July 2024.
28. The Council has said that no further consultation has been carried out with specialist colleges since February 2023. This is because they are unable to get the views of Mr X or Y, to decide what educational placement would be suitable, as Y is now 23 years old.

Annual Review

29. The annual review of the EHC Plan was due by 2 February 2024. The Council noted it was late in its response to Mr X’s official complaint.
30. The Council has said a review was scheduled for February 2025 but was cancelled as Y could not attend.
31. After several attempts, the annual review was finalised on 28 May 2025. The Council said ‘there has been no outcome as Y was not present or became distressed and Mr X did not contribute to the specifics of the review’.
32. There was over a years delay in carrying out the annual review of Y’s plan. If this review had been carried out on time, it could have prevented the issues Mr X complains about. It would have enabled the Council to review the provision and given Mr X a right of appeal to the SEND tribunal if he wished to dispute it.

Injustice

33. It is clear there has been fault by the Council. Mr X has explained that he wishes to get compensation from the Council, to enable him and his family to move back to London which he considers will be better for Y.
34. I do not consider a financial remedy is appropriate as the Council and Mr X have reached an impasse because of the refusal of the Mr X to agree to the college and the lack of engagement with the most recent annual review. Mr X cancelled tuition and clearly Y is struggling to engage with the Council, therapy or education providers.

Back to top

Action

35. Within 3 months of the date of the decision the Council should consider ways to address the current impasse to enable matters to move forward. The Council will need to decide what is the most appropriate way to achieve progress. But options could include:

• consider appointing an advocate to help explore Y’s views and willingness to engage in new social care assessment if this is felt necessary or appropriate.
• issuing a revised EHC Plan based on the Council’s current understanding of Y’s needs.
• Identify what placement and provision would be in Y’s best interests and how lost provision can be made up when considering section F and I of any revised Plan.
• If the Council feel this would not be appropriate, consider issuing a decision to cease to maintain Y’s Plan to ensure appeal rights are engaged.

36. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

37. I have completed my investigation and I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman