Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not provide the therapies and equipment included in his children’s Education, Health and Care Plans. We found the Council failed to secure much of that provision between January 2024 and July 2025, causing injustice to Mr X’s children in the form of lost provision and a reduced capacity to engage with other parts of their education. The Council agreed to our recommendations to apologise and make Mr X a symbolic payment to remedy this injustice. Mr X also complained that the Council should allow his children to repeat the school year. We did not find fault with the Council’s decision to refuse that request.

The complaint

1. Mr X has two sons, Y and Z, who both have special needs and have Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans, issued in January 2024. Both EHC Plans include provision of Occupational Therapy (OT) and Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) assessment and therapy. Mr X complained that this provision has not been secured, and the Council has not provided equipment recommended by OT.
2. Mr X says this has caused the family injustice in terms of distress, stress, frustration, and exhaustion. His sons’ development, already delayed, has been delayed further because of the lack of crucial OT and SALT provision.
3. By way of remedy, Mr X wants:
• OT and SALT to be implemented: all outstanding provision to be secured, including equipment delivery and therapy schedules, as set out in both EHC Plans,
• the allocated funding to be released to their school to resolve outstanding equipment and therapy needs without further delay,
• approved funds to be allocated directly to the school's account each year, and
• the Council to allow both children to repeat their current academic year.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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(1), 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. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council delayed finding a school placement for his two children when they moved into the area, between September 2023 and January 2024. Mr X says these matters are inextricably linked with his current complaints, but they were considered by the Ombudsman in an earlier investigation and so I cannot reconsider them.
8. I have therefore investigated events after 9 January 2024, when Y and Z’s new EHC Plans named a school and set out the additional provision that should be secured for them.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. I sent written questions to both Mr X and the Council and considered their responses.
11. 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

Legislation, policy and guidance

EHC Plan 

12. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an Education, Health and Care (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. 

Content of an EHC Plan

13. The EHC Plan is set out in sections which include: 

• Section B: Special educational needs.
• Section E: The outcomes sought for the child or the young person.
• Section F: The special educational provision needed by the child or the young person. 
• Section I: The name and/or type of educational placement. 

Maintaining the EHC Plan

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)  
15. The SEND Code says the provision should be in place from the date the final EHC Plan is issued. Where the provision is proposed by the council in a draft EHC Plan, the Council should be ready to secure that provision when the EHC Plan is finalised.
16. We accept it is not practical for councils to keep a ‘watching brief’ on whether schools and others are providing all the special educational provision in section F for every pupil with an EHC Plan. We consider councils should be able to demonstrate appropriate oversight in gathering information to fulfil their legal duty. At a minimum we expect them to have systems in place to: 

• check the special educational provision is in place when a new or amended EHC Plan is issued or there is a change in educational placement; 
• check the provision at least annually during the EHC review process; and 
• quickly investigate and act on complaints or concerns raised that the provision is not in place at any time. 

What happened

17. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.

Missed SALT and OT provision from January 2024 onwards

18. Section F of Y and Z’s EHC Plans, issued in January 2024, included that they would each require input from OT and SALT.
19. Mr X complained to the Council in July 2024 that the Council had breached its Section 42 duty by failing to secure the special educational provision in his children’s EHC plans in relation to the OT and SALT hours.
20. The Council acknowledged and apologised for this failing in its August 2024 Stage 1 complaint response and said that it had reached an agreement for the missed therapy hours to be made up in the 2024-2025 academic year.
21. When Mr X asked for his complaint to be escalated to Stage 2, the Council responded on 4 November 2024 that, despite its earlier response, the therapy teams had not confirmed a start date for the provision of therapy. The Council said that its senior managers would liaise directly with their counterparts in the therapy service about this, and Mr X’s EHC Coordinator would provide an update.
22. I asked the Council what OT and SALT provision had been made for Y and Z since January 2024, when their EHC Plans were issued. The Council confirmed that, between January 2024 and July 2025, the Council had secured OT and SALT provision, but this was below the amount specified in Y and Z’s EHC Plans.

Equipment purchase request

23. Section B of Y and Z’s EHC Plans, issued in early January 2024, included that they each had a range of sensory needs. Section F of their Plans included they would need a wide range of sensory-based interventions, equipment and strategies to meet those needs.
24. Section F stated specifically that the school would create a sensory room to meet the children’s needs, but other than that, the funding provided “will be used flexibly, to best support [Y and Z’s] needs and may include resources and/or adult support […] to deliver the programmes and support the arrangements and approaches set out above”.
25. The EHC Plans included that OT would advise on the specific resources and support required. OT carried out assessments and the resulting reports included a detailed list of equipment and other resources such as computer packages, applications, and training courses for staff that would need to be provided to meet Y and Z’s educational needs.
26. Mr X complained to the Council in July 2024 that equipment recommended by OT, costing £4500, was still awaiting local authority approval. He said this delay meant the Learning Support Assistant (LSA) could not implement OT recommendations effectively and Y and Z’s ability to engage with the curriculum and develop key skills was being compromised.
27. The Council responded at Stage 1 of the complaints procedure on 14 August. That response said that the Council had escalated Mr X’s request for equipment to the relevant manager, and that it would update him on the outcome of this request.
28. Mr X remained dissatisfied and complained further on 15 August. The Council responded at Stage 2 of the complaints procedure on 4 November, saying that it had agreed the equipment request in in full on 1 November 2024. The Council apologised for the delay in providing the outcome.
29. In July 2025, Mr X told me that the OT-recommended equipment had not been provided.

Request to repeat a year

30. In June 2024, Mr X applied for Y and Z to repeat their current school year, starting in September 2024. The Council considered this request via its Offset Panel (a panel that considers requests for pupils to repeat an academic year) and refused it in July 2024.
31. Mr X made a Stage 1 complaint in July 2024. The Council responded in August 2024, saying that the Offset Panel had refused the request because:

“Offset is used to allow learners to repeat a year due to the fact they have gaps in their learning or because their SEN requires them to have a slightly lower key stage due to their SEN or processing needs. This is not the case for [Y] and [Z] and as stated they already receive a specialised and highly differentiated curriculum. Therefore it is not necessary to off-set them."

32. Mr X complained at Stage 2 that the Council had not considered a number of important points when making its decision. The Council agreed to take his case back to the Offset Panel for further consideration.
33. The Offset Panel considered the matter again in September 2024, and again decided – for the reasons set out above – that it was not necessary for Y and Z to repeat a year. The Council reiterated the Panel’s decision in its Stage 2 response letter of November 2024.

Analysis

Missed SALT and OT provision from January 2024 onwards

34. As set out at paragraph 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.”
35. The Council issued Y and Z’s EHC Plan in January 2024. It was under a duty to secure the OT and SALT provision from then on.
36. The Council gave me an account of provision made compared with provision specified. This showed a shortfall of OT provision and SALT provision for both children, across five terms. These shortfalls are fault, as is the fact that the Council did not fulfil the agreement to catch up on 2023-24 provision in 2024-25.
37. The injustice caused by the Council’s fault, in addition to the uncertainty, frustration and distress suffered by the whole family, was that both children were unable to engage as effectively with the remainder of their specified provision as they otherwise would have been, as the OT and SALT therapies were intended to support them with that.

Equipment purchase request

38. As set out above, Y and Z’s EHC Plans, including the need for sensory equipment and resources, were issued in January 2024. The Council therefore had a duty to secure this provision in line with Section 42.
39. Although the SEND Code says the provision should be in place from the date the final EHC Plan is issued, a further OT assessment was required to fully specify the equipment. And so, I find that a reasonable timescale for that assessment, and the ordering and delivery of the equipment, would have been in time for the start of the 2024 summer term. As of July 2025, and despite repeated chasing from Mr X, the Council had not provided this equipment. This delay of four terms is fault.
40. This fault caused Mr X the injustice of time and trouble in chasing an outcome. The equipment was required to help Y and Z to engage with the teaching staff, and with their education. In the absence of the equipment Y and Z were unable to access their full special educational provision.

Request to repeat a year

41. Mr X did not complain that the Council was at fault in the way in which it considered his request for his children to be allowed to repeat a school year. Rather, he complained that he disagreed with the outcome of the Panel’s considerations.
42. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
43. I have considered the steps the Council took to consider the issue (specifically, that the appropriate Council Panel considered Mr X’s request and supporting information, twice) and the information it took account of when deciding not to allow Y and Z to repeat the school year. I have seen no evidence of fault in how it took the decision and I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong.

Back to top

Action

44. To remedy the injustice caused by the identified faults, the Council has agreed, within four weeks of my final decision, to:
• Apologise to Mr X for the faults identified above;
• Produce an action plan setting out when it will procure the OT-recommended equipment;
• Make a payment of £4000 to Mr X, for Y and Z’s benefit, for the impact of the lost provision in terms of OT and SALT between January 2024 and July 2025, and OT equipment between Easter 2024 and July 2025.
45. This payment is a symbolic amount in line with our published guidance on remedies.
46. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

47. I found fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy the injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman