Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to provide some Speech and Language Therapy set out in her child’s Education, Health and Care plan. We found the Council at fault, which caused Ms X injustice. The Council should make a payment and apologise to Ms X.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council failing to provide some Speech and Language Therapy (SaLT) set out in her child’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan. She reports the Council’s communication about this matter has been poor throughout. She says this issue has had a detrimental impact on both her and her child’s well-being.

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. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. 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)
6. 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

7. Ms X complains about the failure from the Council to complete an annual review of her child’s EHC plan from 2022. The Council say it is now completing a review.
8. I have not investigated this. There is evidence that Ms X knew about the failure from the Council in 2022. Ms X complained to us in November 2024. Therefore, issues which occurred before November 2023 would be considered late. As I have said above, I cannot investigate late complaints unless there are good reasons for us to do so.
9. I accept that Ms X believes that if the review was completed sooner the extra support recommended by this, could have been in place sooner. However, we cannot fairly conclude what the outcome of the review would have been if it had been held sooner.
10. I have decided to exercise my discretion to investigate the issues with the SaLT provision which originate from 2022 onward. Ms X has explained that she only became aware of this issue, when she was preparing information for her appeal at the end of 2024. She then raised this issue to the Council immediately. I would not expect Ms X to know if the provision had not taken place at school, and so I find it fair that I consider this matter now.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
12. I have also considered the relevant statutory guidance, as set out below. Also, I have considered the Ombudsman’s published guidance on remedies.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

13. 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.
14. 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)  

What happened

15. Ms X’s child is entitled to receive 4.5 hours of SaLT per academic year according to their EHC plan dated September 2021.
16. In January 2025, Ms X contacted the Council to dispute the provision her child received regarding SaLT from 2022 to present.
17. After a discussion, the Council agreed that two sessions had been missed and agreed to provide extra sessions in 2025.
18. Ms X says that no extra sessions have been arranged, and her child has also not had any SaLT provision in 2025.

Analysis

19. The Council and Ms X agree that in the summer of 2023 and the spring of 2024, the SaLT provision did not take place. Ms X has also disputed whether the provision took place in the summer of 2022. Additionally, the summer of 2024 and the spring of 2025.
20. There are unclear notes to support that a visit took place in the summer of 2022, and I consider on the balance of probabilities that it did not. In the summer of 2024, the notes are clearer, and a visit is listed as taking place in April. As a result, I consider that this did take place.
21. Finally in the spring of 2025, the NHS reported that a visit took place on 17 March 2025 however Ms X disputes this. There is not enough evidence to decide fairly, however I have considered below the uncertainty that this would have caused.
22. I consider the failure to provide the provision set out in the EHC plan to be fault by the Council. The fault would have impacted the child by causing them distress in missing this provision they were entitled to receive. Also, in the distress to Ms X when she later discovered this.
23. The distress is also increased by the uncertainty of not knowing whether provision did take place. The Council in its response, was unclear, and on occasions false in stating that provision had taken place, when in fact it was discovered later that it had not.
24. Also, the Council agreed to provide extra provision to cover the sessions which had been missed, however there is no evidence that it completed this. Again, I consider this to be fault by the Council which would have caused Ms X distress in the form of uncertainty. I find the Council should arrange for an additional three SaLT sessions to take place.
25. The Council should also apologise to Ms X for the injustice she and her child have experienced. I have also made an award in consideration of this in line with our guidance on remedies.

Back to top

Action

26. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Provide a written apology to Ms X for the unnecessary and avoidable distress caused by the failure to provide full and consistent SaLT provision and communication. This apology should be in line with our guidance on making an effective apology
2. Pay £250 for the failure to provide some SaLT provision and for the distress this caused along with the communication inconsistency.
3. Confirm it will arrange an additional three SaLT sessions.
27. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

28. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Ms X.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman