Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed agreeing to, then completing, an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan, and this prevented her son, B, from accessing support. We have found that the Council is at fault for the delays. It has agreed to pay £500 in recognition of the avoidable uncertainty and inconvenience caused to Mrs X and B.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council delayed agreeing to, then completing, an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for her son, B. She said this caused her and B uncertainty and prevented B from accessing support.

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 First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the Tribunal in this decision statement.
4. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council, as well as relevant law, policy and guidance. I have considered events relating to B’s EHC Plan from February 2024, when Mrs X first requested an EHC Plan for B, until the final Plan was issued in April 2025.
7. I have not considered any complaint about the Council’s decision to not carry out an EHC assessment. This is because Mrs X used her right of appeal to the Tribunal to challenge the Council’s decision.
8. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
9. 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 found

EHC Plans

10. 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. 
11. Statutory guidance ‘Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years’ (‘the Code’) sets out the process for carrying out EHC assessments and producing EHC Plans. The guidance is based on the Children and Families Act 2014 and the SEN Regulations 2014. It says the following: 

• Where the council receives a request for an EHC needs assessment it must decide whether to agree to the assessment and send its decision to the parent of the child or the young person within six weeks. 
• The process of assessing needs and developing EHC Plans “must be carried out in a timely manner”. Steps must be completed as soon as practicable. 
• If the council goes on to carry out an assessment, it must decide whether to issue an EHC Plan or refuse to issue a Plan within 16 weeks.
• If the council goes on to issue an EHC Plan, the whole process from the point when an assessment is requested until the final EHC Plan is issued must take no more than 20 weeks (unless certain specific circumstances apply);  

12. As part of the assessment, councils must gather advice from relevant professionals (SEND Regulation 6(1)). This includes: 

• the child’s educational placement; 
• medical advice and information from health care professionals involved with the child; 
• psychological advice and information from an Educational Psychologist (EP); 
• social care advice and information; 
• advice and information from any person requested by the parent or young person, where the council considers it reasonable; and 
• any other advice and information the council considers appropriate for a satisfactory assessment. 

Appeal Rights

13. There is a right of appeal to the Tribunal against a council’s:
• decision not to carry out an EHC needs assessment or reassessment;
• decision that it is not necessary to issue a EHC Plan following an assessment;
• description of a child or young person’s SEN, the special educational provision specified, the school or placement or that no school or other placement is specified in their EHC Plan;
• amendment to these elements of an EHC Plan;
• decision not to amend an EHC Plan following a review or reassessment; and
• decision to cease to maintain an EHC Plan.
14. The courts have established that if someone has appealed to the Tribunal, the law says we cannot investigate any matter which was part of, was connected to, or could have been part of, the appeal to the Tribunal. (R (on application of Milburn) v Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman [2023] EWCA Civ 207)
15. The period we cannot investigate starts from the date the appealable decision is made and given to the parents or young person. If the parent or young person goes on to appeal then the period that we cannot investigate ends when the Tribunal comes to its decision, or if the appeal is withdrawn or conceded. We would not usually look at the period while any changes to the EHC Plan are finalised, so long as the council follows the statutory timescales to make those amendments.

What happened

16. B was attending part-time alternative provision as his designated school could not meet his needs. Mrs X requested an EHC Needs Assessment for B in February 2024.
17. The Council contacted B’s designated school for comments but says it did not receive any response. It also contacted the Educational Psychology service which advised B was not known to it.
18. The Council advised Mrs X of its decision not to assess B’s EHC needs in March 2024, nearly 5 weeks after it received the request. Mrs X asked the Council to reconsider its decision. She then asked for a meeting to discuss next steps, but the Council did not respond to Mrs X.
19. Mrs X made an appeal against the Council’s decision to not assess B’s EHC needs in April 2024. In May 2024 the Council asked the school again for its comments. The Council chased the school for a response in June 2024 but did not receive any reply.
20. The Council contacted Mrs X to advise of its revised decision to assess B for an EHC Plan in June 2024. It said it considered the process at week 7 at the date of this decision.
21. In August 2024, 27 weeks after the initial request, Mrs X contacted the Council chasing the draft EHC Plan. She then made a complaint to the Council in late August 2024. B started attending college full time in September 2024.
22. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint in October 2024 and apologised for the delay. The response said the Council would “expedite the assessment”. Mrs X asked to escalate her complaint to stage 2 at the end of October 2024 as she had still not received a draft EHC Plan for B. The Council responded to the stage 2 complaint in March 2025 and apologised again for the delays.
23. The Council provided a draft EHC Plan in March 2025 and invited Mrs X and B to comment. The Council issued a final EHC Plan in April 2025. This was over 41 weeks after Mrs X originally asked the Council for an assessment, and 24 weeks from the date of its decision to complete an EHC assessment for B.

Analysis

24. The Council made its original decision to not assess B’s EHC needs within the 6-week timescale but without obtaining comment from B’s school, or other evidence. Mrs X was able to appeal this decision, but the Council changed its decision without receiving any new information and before the appeal hearing took place. I am unable to investigate the period from March 2024 until June 2024 due to Mrs X using her right of appeal. I am able to consider events from when the Council decided to complete an EHC assessment in June 2024.
25. There was a delay between June 2024 and March 2025 when the Council provided a draft of the EHC Plan. The final plan was issued in April 2025, which is a delay of 24 weeks. This is fault, causing Mrs X and B uncertainty. Mrs X also suffered stress and inconvenience as she had to chase the Council for updates.
26. When Mrs X made the request for an EHC assessment in February 2024, B was attending part-time alternative educational provision. He continued to attend this provision until the end of the school year in 2024 and started attending college full-time in September 2024. Whilst there was no EHC Plan in place, Mrs X has reported that the college put measures in place, including regular check-ins, to ensure B was appropriately supported. Therefore, B did not miss out on education as a result of the delays, however, he did suffer uncertainty which is injustice.
27. There was also a delay in the complaint handling by the Council. The Council’s complaints policy says it will respond within 20 working days to complaints raised at both stage 1 and 2. Mrs X raised a stage 2 complaint in October 2024 but did not receive a response until March 2025. This delay of 14 weeks caused Mrs X distress and frustration.
28. We have investigated similar cases in recent months. We have made recommendations in those cases and the Council has agreed to complete an action plan to reduce delays in the EHC assessment and review process. Therefore, I am not making service improvement recommendations in this case.

Back to top

Action

29. In recognition of the injustice caused to Mrs X and B, within one month of the final decision, the Council should:
• Apologise to Mrs X and B in accordance with our guidance on making an effective apology;
• Pay Mrs X £500 in recognition of the avoidable inconvenience and uncertainty.

Back to top

Decision

30. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman