Summary: We upheld Mrs X’s complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care process and about the Council’s poor communication. The Council apologised and offered a £1,000 symbolic payment in line with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about advocacy costs because we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X wants.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council:
• failed to adhere to the statutory timescales regarding her child, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan; and
• failed to communicate with her effectively.
2. Mrs X said the matter caused her distress, frustration, and uncertainty.
3. Mrs X wants the Council to pay a financial remedy and reimburse the cost of an advocate.

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. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
6. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
7. 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.
8. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
9. 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

10. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
11. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

EHC delay and communication

12. We uphold Mrs X’s complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care process regarding her child, Y, and about the Council’s poor communication. This is because, in its complaint response, the Council upheld the complaints.
13. The Council agreed to conduct an EHC needs assessment of Y in early June 2024. To comply with the SEND regulations, because the Council decided to make an EHC Plan for Y, it should have done so within 14 weeks from the date it agreed to assess – by mid-September 2025. It did not send the final EHC Plan until late January 2025 – a delay of approximately 19 weeks.
14. Mrs X submitted a stage two complaint request in mid-December 2024. The Council did not respond until late May 2025. This was a delay of approximately two and a half months beyond the timescales set in the Council’s policy.
15. In its complaint response the Council apologised to Mrs X and offered a total symbolic payment of £1,000 to acknowledge the distress, frustration, and uncertainty caused by the delays. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies. Consequently, although we uphold the complaint, we will not investigate because an investigation is unlikely to achieve any additional outcome.
16. During other recent investigations by the Ombudsman the Council has provided evidence of changes it is making to its services to prevent this type of fault. These changes will take time to establish. Consequently, an investigation is unlikely to achieve any additional outcome.

Reimbursement of advocacy costs and SEND Tribunal

17. In January 2025 Mrs X appointed the services of an advocate. Mrs X said she required the support of an advocate due to the Council’s poor communication and decision-making regarding Y’s named school.
18. The Ombudsman will not investigate this matter. This is because it was Mrs X’s choice to employ the services of an advocate. We could not say the Council’s actions meant Mrs X had no choice but to employ the services of an advocate.
19. In any case, the process of challenging the named school in section I is via the SEND Tribunal. For other matters, the Council’s complaints process and the Ombudsman is available. These services are free and accessible and do not require an advocate for most people. Therefore, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

20. We upheld Mrs X’s complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care process and about the Council’s poor communication. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about advocacy costs because we cannot achieve the outcome she wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman