Summary: Miss X complained the Council delayed carrying out a review of her son’s Education, Health and Care Plan. The review should have been completed by 24 November 2024 but the final plan was not issued until July 2025, after Miss X complained to the Ombudsman. This delay is fault and has caused Miss X and her son distress and frustrated her appeal rights. A symbolic payment to recognise this is agreed.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council delayed carrying out a review of her son’s Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan).
2. She says this has caused frustration, distress and uncertainty to herself and her son.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
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

What I have and have not investigated

6. This complaint is concerned with the Council’s actions in respect of the annual review process from October 2024.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

Reviewing EHC Plans

9. 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) 
10. If the council decides not to amend an EHC Plan or decides to cease to maintain it, it must inform the child’s parents or the young person of their right to appeal the decision to the tribunal.
11. 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.

Key facts

12. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
13. The Council agreed to carry out a needs assessment for Miss X’s son, Z, in December 2022. A final EHC Plan was issued in May 2023. The first annual review of that EHC Plan should have taken place within 12 months but did not. An annual review meeting took place on 9 October 2023 and resulted in a new EHC Plan being issued in January 2024. Miss X says she called the meeting on 9 October and that it was not initially arranged as an annual review meeting.
14. Miss X complained to the Council on 27 September 2024 about the delay in arranging a review of the EHC Plan. It replied on 31 October. It said that the caseworker had contacted Miss X on 8 October to arrange the annual review but suggested a date that was not convenient due to it being during the half term break. It was then agreed the meeting would take place in the week commencing 25 November to ensure the report of Z’s recent diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder was available.
15. The Council upheld the complaint and apologised for the delay in arranging the annual review. It said a new caseworker had been allocated and he would contact Miss X by 1 November to ensure the annual review meeting is organised promptly. However, staff changes meant another caseworker was allocated and he emailed Miss X on 26 November. Dates for the annual review were not offered until mid-January 2025. The meeting took place on 25 February 2025.
16. The Council issued the draft EHC Plan on 14 May. This was after the Ombudsman accepted her complaint about the delay. The final EHC Plan was issued on 2 July 2025 after my draft decision was issued.

Analysis

17. Councils must review EHC Plans at least annually. The annual review process includes a review meeting. The meeting should be timed so the whole process is completed within 12 months of the previous meeting, unless the Council decides to amend the plan. In those cases, the Council must notify the parent of the decision to amend the plan within four weeks of the annual review meeting and then issue the final amended plan within eight weeks. The next review must be completed within 12 months of the previous decision to amend letter.
18. The annual review meeting in 2023 took place on 9 October and the Council sent the decision to review letter on 24 November 2023. This means the next annual review should have been completed by 24 November 2024. However, by that date the annual review meeting had not even taken place. The annual review meeting was eventually held on 25 February 2025.
19. The Council’s failure to issue the final amended EHC Plan within the statutory timescale is fault. This is stressful for Miss X and frustrates her rights of appeal which do not engage until the final EHC Plan is issued.

Back to top

Action

20. To remedy the injustice caused as a result of the fault identified in this case, the Council will, within one month of my final decision, take the following action:
• Apologise to Miss X and Z for the fault identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings;
• Make Miss X a symbolic payment of £500 to recognise her distress and frustrated appeal rights; and
• Remind staff either by training or written guidance that it must complete annual reviews within the statutory timescales.
21. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

22. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault for the reasons explained in this statement. The Council has agreed to implement the actions I have recommended. These appropriately remedy any injustice caused by fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman