Summary: We upheld Mr X’s complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care process regarding his child, Y, and about the Council’s poor communication. This is because the Council upheld the complaint, apologised to Mr X, and offered him a £700 symbolic payment in line with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council delayed completing his child, Y’s, Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan in line with the statutory timescales and about the Council’s poor communication.
2. Mr X said the matter caused him distress and uncertainty.

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 provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended).
4. 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

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X has a child, Y. Mr X asked the Council to conduct an EHC needs assessment of Y. The Council agreed and later decided to make an EHC Plan for Y.
8. Mr X complained to the Council. He said the Council failed to adhere to the statutory timescales regarding the EHC process and said the Council had not communicated with him effectively.
9. In its complaint response the Council upheld Mr X’s complaints. It explained the EHC process should have finished by November 2024. However, the final EHC Plan was not made until March 2025. It apologised to Mr X and offered him a £400 symbolic financial remedy to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty caused by the delay.
10. The Council also upheld Mr X’s complaint about its communication. It explained service improvements it was making to enable it to respond to increased demands on its service. The Council apologised for its poor communication and offered Mr X a £300 symbolic financial remedy to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty caused by its poor communication.
11. In response to other recent investigations, the Council provided the Ombudsman with information about the service improvements it is making and the changes to its services to ensure it meets its statutory obligations relating to EHC Plans.

Analysis

12. The Council upheld Mr X’s complaint. It accepted it did not adhere to the statutory timescales and that its communication was not always effective. It offered remedies in line with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies. Consequently, although we uphold this decision, we will not investigate because an investigation is unlikely to achieve any additional outcome.
13. In addition, the Ombudsman has seen evidence of the changes the Council is making to its services. Therefore, an investigation into the systemic matters complained about is unlikely to result in any additional outcomes. This is because the Council requires time to implement its improvement plan and monitor its effectiveness. Therefore, we will not investigate further.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We upheld Mr X’s complaint because the Council upheld his complaint and offered a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman