Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about a failure to provide a suitable education and delays in issuing an Education Health and Care Plan. It is unlikely we would achieve a significantly different remedy than the Council has already offered. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider a data protection complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss X says the Council failed to provide Y with a suitable education and delayed in issuing an Education Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan).

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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome; or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (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 Miss X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X requested an EHC Plan assessment in December 2023 for Y. The Council assessed Y and it says produced a final EHC Plan in September 2024. Miss X says this was not signed. She says it was of poor quality and did not meet Y’s needs. She says the school named said it could not meet Y’s needs.
6. Y was out of education from the beginning of September. Y started limited alternative education in October 2024. In December the Council held an emergency meeting and agreed the school needed to change. It amended the EHC Plan and issued a new final EHC Plan in March 2025. Y has since begun a part time timetable at the new setting.
7. The Council has accepted it delayed beyond the regulation timescales for issuing an EHC Plan and failed to provide a suitable education from September 2024. It offered in reply to Miss X’s complaint in March 2025 £500 for distress, and £2400 for missed education. It also offered to refund Miss X’s travel costs to the alternative provision Y had attended since October. This remedy is in line with our guidance and we are unlikely to achieve more.
8. Miss X also says the Council failed to attend a Child in Need meeting. The Council has apologised. There is no significant remedy our investigation would achieve for this.
9. Miss X also complained about a data protection subject access (SAR) request. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is the UK’s independent authority set up to uphold information rights. It promotes openness by public bodies and protects the privacy of individuals. It deals with complaints about public authorities’ failures to comply with data protection legislation, such as subject access requests.
10. There is no charge for making a complaint to the ICO, and its complaints procedure is relatively easy to use. Where someone has a complaint about data protection, the Ombudsman usually expects them to bring the matter to the attention of the ICO. This is because the ICO is in a better position than the Ombudsman to consider such complaints. I consider that to be the case here

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would achieve a significantly different remedy, and the ICO is better placed to consider a SAR complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman