Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of an Education Health and Care Plan transfer. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council handled the transfer of his child, Y’s Education Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan) to a different Local Authority. He said the Council ended its responsibility for the delivery of the EHC Plan, before the receiving Authority accepted responsibility for it. Mr X wants the Council to recognise it should have retained oversight of the EHC Plan for longer.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained to the Council about the transfer of Y’s EHC Plan. He also said it delayed in issuing a blue badge for Y and refused to pay for services specified in the EHC Plan.
6. The Council investigated Mr X’s complaint through the children’s statutory complaints procedure. At stage one it upheld his complaint about the refusal to pay for services specified in the EHC Plan. It reimbursed those costs.
7. At stage two, the Investigating Officer (IO) upheld the complaint about delays in issuing the blue badge. The Council agreed to reimburse Mr X parking costs he had accrued.
8. The IO did not uphold the complaint about the transfer of the EHC Plan. They said the Council had told the new Local Authority that Y had moved into its area. That Authority confirmed it received the transfer notification. From that date, in line with statutory guidance, the IO said the receiving Local Authority should have assumed responsibility for the EHC Plan. They said any failings to do so was not the responsibility of the Council. This finding was reviewed at stage three and remained not upheld.
9. Although Mr X disagrees with the finding we will not investigate this complaint. That is because there are no flaws in how the IO or stage three panel considered the complaint. They have applied the relevant statutory guidance which sets out the responsibilities for the transfer of an EHC Plan. In addition, the Council has satisfactorily remedied Mr X’s complaints about the blue badge and failed payments. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman