Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed in completing the review of her daughter’s Education, Health and Care plan. Because of this delay, she reported that her daughter stopped receiving some speech and language therapy provision and further provision through an occupational therapist. She also confirmed the Council failed to provide a tutor. We find the Council at fault which caused Mrs X and her daughter injustice. We propose the Council should make payments and apologise to Mrs X and her daughter.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council delayed in completing the review of her daughter's Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan. She says the Council also failed to provide some provision set out in the plan such as a Speech and Language therapist (SaLT) and Occupational Therapist (OT). Also, the Council failed to provide a Personal Assistant (PA) for her daughter (Z).
2. Mrs X says that this impacted her and Z by causing them unnecessary distress and spending extra time in trying to resolve this matter. It has also impacted Z as Mrs X says that she has lost confidence and momentum in her learning because of this issue.

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. Mrs X has complained about an ongoing lack of provision particularly relating to the lack of a PA. The Council has provided evidence of offering a tutor in June 2025 and so I have considered the lack of provision in this regard, up to that date. Any lack of provision experienced after this date, would be the basis of a new complaint.
7. Mrs X has also mentioned historical missed provision which was previously remedied. I understand Mrs X remains unhappy with the overall service she has and continues to receive from the Council. However, my investigation will solely focus on the events included within the time frame of August 2024 to June 2025.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

10. 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.
11. 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)  
12. 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) 

What happened

13. In June 2024 the Council arranged an annual review of Z’s EHC plan, which was due to take place in August 2024. Mrs X however contacted the Council to explain she could not make the scheduled meeting due to personal reasons, and then her and Z were due to go on a family holiday. Mrs X asked to postpone the review until after the holidays, when she would contact it to find a new date.
14. At the beginning of the academic year in September 2024, Mrs X confirms the Council stopped the SaLT and OT provision. It also failed to source a PA tutor for Z.
15. After Mrs X contacted the Council in September 2024, an annual review took place in November 2024, and it agreed that SaLT and OT provision should be recommissioned.
16. The Council say that it arranged for OT provision to be provided again in December 2024. Mrs X confirms that SaLT provision is also now back in place. In June 2025 the Council secured a PA tutor who agreed to provide extra provision over the summer holidays if Z wanted to do this.

EHC plan review

17. The Council had scheduled an annual review of Z’s plan to take place within 12 months of the date of her last EHC plan. The Council had scheduled the review with two months’ notice, and I do not find it at fault here. However, Mrs X contacted the Council within a week of the scheduled meeting to explain she would not be able to make it, and she wished to reschedule.
18. I do not find fault with the Council agreeing to delay the EHC review in August 2024 at the request of Mrs X. After this when the new school year commenced, I do find the Council could have been more proactive in arranging the review with Mrs X as this did not take place until November 2024.
19. If it had, this could have prevented Mrs X from having to contact it back. In consideration of this matter, I find the Council should apologise to Mrs X.

OT provision

20. The Council says that due to the annual review not taking place for the EHC plan, the provision did not recommence at the start of the new academic year in September 2024. I consider this to be fault by the Council. If no annual review had taken place, then the provision set out in the existing plan would remain until the Council had decided to either, renew, cease or amend the EHC plan.
21. In its stage one response to the complaint, the Council admitted to this fault and offered to remedy this by offering £200 per month of missed provision. I am satisfied that this offer is within our guidelines on remedies on this matter. The stage one response remedied the lack of provision for two months; however, the Council only resolved the issue in December 2024. I have therefore increased the award to consider the additional month of missed provision.

SaLT provision

22. Similarly to the OT provision, the Council again confirmed that it did not renew this due to the lack of review taking place. Again, I find this to be fault by the Council.
23. Following the annual review the Council says that it recommissioned the SaLT provision but cannot provide a precise date of when this recommenced. Mrs X has confirmed that SaLT provision is now in place.
24. The lack of provision would have impacted Z both in the terms of the distress it would have caused and that she was entitled to receive this provision to help her development.
25. I have therefore recommended the Council should remedy the lack of SaLT provision up to December 2024. It should do this at the same amount as the missed OT provision, as again this is in line with our guidance on remedies.

PA tutor

26. Mrs X confirms the Council failed to secure a PA tutor for Z, and this has continued throughout the academic year starting in September 2024. Within Z’s EHC plan it confirms that she is entitled to 10 hours of provision for use with a PA or tutor. I consider the Council to be at fault for the failure to secure this provision.
27. Again, this would have impacted Z by causing her avoidable distress which would have been enhanced because this was continuing over a long period of time.
28. I have therefore considered the impact of this within my recommendations including the added distress this would have caused Z as she is taking examinations.
29. The Council is on an agreed action plan with us to improve its service regarding Special Educational Needs and so I have not recommended any service improvements because of this.

Back to top

Action

30. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Provide a written apology to Mrs X and Z for the unnecessary and avoidable distress caused by the failure to provide full and consistent provision and communication.
2. Pay £600 for the delay in providing OT provision from September to December 2024
3. Pay £600 for the delay in providing SaLT provision from September to December 2024
4. Pay £2,700 for the failure to secure a Personal Assistant from September 2024 to June 2025.
31. 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.
32. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

33. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and make payments to Mrs X.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman