Kent County Council (24 022 223)
Category : Education > Special educational needs
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 24 Apr 2025
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about an educational psychologist report commissioned as part of the Education Health and Care needs assessment process for her son. This is because Mrs X believes the report led to the wrongful refusal of her application for an Education Health and Care Plan and it would be reasonable for her to appeal against this decision. The Tribunal is better placed to determine whether the report was flawed and it has the power to overturn the Council’s decision, which we do not.
The complaint
- Mrs X complains about an educational psychologist report commissioned by the Council. She believes it led to the wrongful refusal of her application for an Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan for her son.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
- The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
- 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.
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Final decision
- We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is not for us to determine the lawfulness, validity or accuracy of the educational psychologist’s report or to say the Council’s decision not to issue an EHC Plan is wrong. If Mrs X believes the report is flawed and wishes to overturn the decision it would be reasonable for her to appeal to the Tribunal.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman