Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of her son, Mr X, that the Council failed to deliver provision outlined in his Education, Health and Care Plan. Mrs X said the Council did not communicate properly or make an adequate assessment of Mr X’s needs. Mrs X also complained about how the Council handled her complaint. She said the Council’s actions incurred a large financial loss to the family and caused Mr X to miss out on provision he was entitled to. She said the Council’s actions also caused a significant impact on Mr X’s mental health as well as time, trouble and distress to the family. We found fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to provide an apology and a financial remedy and to carry out service improvements.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to deliver provision outlined in his Education, Health and Care Plan. He said the Council did not communicate properly or make an adequate assessment of his needs. Mr X’s mother, Mrs X, complained she suffered a large financial loss, having to privately source provision and support for Mr X due to the Council’s failings. Mrs X also complained about how the Council handled her complaint. Mrs X said Mr X missed out on provision he was entitled to, and the impact on his mental health has been significant. She said they have both suffered undue time, trouble and distress because of the Council’s actions.

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 Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
6. 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)
7. 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.
8. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

9. I have investigated the complaint referred to in paragraph one for the period January 2024 (12 months prior to the Council’s final complaint response) to January 2025 (when the Council concluded its consideration of Mrs X’s complaint). I have not investigated events prior to January 2024 because there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to do so.
10. Mrs X raised a separate complaint with the Council in February 2025 regarding its notification letter issued in December 2024. Mrs X also raised additional concerns about events which took place after January 2025, and about a failure to provide transparent information about funding. I have not investigated these matters because they fall outside the scope of the Council’s complaint investigation which was concluded in January 2025.
11. Mrs X lodged an appeal to the Tribunal about the contents of Mr X’s Education, Health and Care Plan. All matters relating to the Education, Health and Care Plan, including points about reassessment, are not considered in this investigation. The only related point I can consider is that of delay in the Councils actions before Mrs X lodged the appeal.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

12. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
13. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
14. 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

15. A child or young person with special educational needs (SEN) may have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This 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. 
16. 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 cease to maintain 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) 
17. Where the council proposes to amend an EHC Plan, the law says it must send the child’s parent or the young person a copy of the existing (non-amended) Plan and an accompanying notice providing details of the proposed amendments, including copies of any evidence to support the proposed changes. (Section 22(2) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.194). Case law sets out this should happen within four weeks of the date of the review meeting. Case law also found councils must issue the final amended EHC Plan within a further eight weeks.
18. 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.

Personal budgets

19. A Personal Budget is the amount of money the council has identified it needs to pay to secure the provision in a child or young person’s EHC Plan. One way that councils can deliver a Personal Budget is through direct payments. These are cash payments made to the child’s parent or the young person so they can commission the provision in the EHC Plan themselves.
20. The final allocation of a Personal Budget must be sufficient to secure the agreed provision specified in the EHC Plan and must be set out as part of that provision.
21. The council’s (and health commissioning body’s where relevant) duty to secure or arrange provision specified in EHC Plans is only discharged through a direct payment when the provision has been acquired for, or on behalf of, the child’s parent or the young person.

Principles of good administrative practice

22. In 2018 the Ombudsman published a guidance document (updated in January 2025), setting out the standards we expect from bodies in jurisdiction “Principles of Good Administrative Practice”. This includes:
• Stating the criteria for decision making and giving reasons for decisions
• Keeping proper and appropriate records
• Explaining clearly the rationale for decisions and recording them

What happened

23. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
24. Mr X has an EHC Plan. In 2023, Mrs X appealed to the Tribunal on behalf of Mr X regarding the content of the plan. As part of this process, Mrs X provided privately commissioned therapist’s assessments.
25. The Tribunal agreed the provision assessed by the privately commissioned therapists. In January 2024, it ordered the Council to issue an amended EHC Plan by early February 2024, to include provision from an occupational therapist (OT) and a speech and language therapist (SALT).
26. In February 2024, the Council issued the final EHC Plan which specified the required provision from an OT and SALT.
27. In March 2024, Mrs X asked the Council for an update on the OT and SALT provision. The Council told Mrs X it had contacted health partners to discuss how to deliver the OT and SALT provision.
28. Mrs X complained to the Council on 24 April 2024. She said the Council had failed to take action following the conclusion of the Tribunal appeal.
29. In May 2024, the Council confirmed it could not provide the required OT and SALT provision through its commissioned services. The Council also confirmed its health partners were unable to deliver the level of required provision. The Council agreed to fund the OT and SALT provision via a Personal Budget.
30. Mrs X complained to the Council again on 23 May 2024 regarding the missed provision.
31. In June 2024, the Council agreed to Mrs X independently sourcing OT and SALT provision. At about this time, Mrs X provided a quote for the provision of OT services.
32. In early July 2024, Mrs X complained to the Council. She said she had not received funding for the OT provision. The Council apologised and said it would backdate funding to April 2024. Mrs X responded and said Mr X was entitled to OT provision from February 2024.
33. On 12 July 2024, Mr X’s EHC Plan underwent an annual review.
34. On 24 July 2024, Mrs X provided a quote for SALT provision.
35. On 10 October 2024, the Council sent an amendment notice to Mrs X, following the annual review held on 12 July 2024. The Council agreed to amend several sections of Mr X’s EHC Plan.

Mrs X’s complaint

36. On 20 October 2024, Mrs X submitted a further complaint to the Council. She raised a number of concerns, including a failure to secure provision specified by the EHC Plan, delays following the annual review in July 2024, and a failure to respond to previous complaints. Mrs X also said the Council had failed to reimburse agreed expenses, including a replacement chair for Mr X.
37. The Council replied on 8 November 2024. It acknowledged:
• a delay in implementing the OT and SALT provision
• a delay in releasing funds for the OT provision
• a delay in accepting the SALT report provided by Mrs X in July 2024
• a delay in reimbursing Mrs X for agreed expenses
• a delay in providing the amendment notice following the annual review in July 2024
• a delay in providing the proposed amendments to the EHC Plan
38. The Council also acknowledged it should have provided better communication to Mrs X regarding the challenges it had faced in trying to secure the OT and SALT provision. It also acknowledged its records were unclear as to which providers the Council had consulted. The Council said it had tried to address the outstanding issues raised by Mrs X, but acknowledged it had not provided a full and formal response to her previous complaints.
39. The Council apologised to Mrs X and agreed to reimburse the cost of SALT provision already made and to reimburse other agreed expenses. The Council said it would provide Mrs X with the proposed EHC Plan amendments within two weeks.
40. Mrs X escalated her complaint on 15 December 2024. She said the Council had not yet provided the EHC Plan amendments and had not issued a final EHC Plan. Mrs X also complained the Council had not released the full funding for the OT and SALT provision and had not reimbursed the full cost of related expenses. Mrs X said the Council’s acknowledgement of its failures did not mitigate the uncertainty, significant stress and financial hardship caused to her family.
41. On 20 December 2024, the Council issued the final EHC Plan. It apologised for the delay and confirmed it had issued the final plan without first issuing a draft EHC Plan, at Mrs X’s request. The Council confirmed it had arranged direct payments for the provision set out in the EHC Plan.

The Council’s final complaint response

42. On 17 January 2025, the Council issued its final complaint response. It said it had issued the final EHC Plan without first issuing a draft because of Mrs X’s concerns about ongoing delays, and to enable her right to appeal to the Tribunal. The Council acknowledged the delays following the annual review in July 2024, the delays in reimbursing agreed expenses, and a shortfall in the funding provided to Mrs X. The Council confirmed the amounts to be paid regarding the OT and SALT provision, and offered a financial remedy to acknowledge the stress and worry caused by the shortfall. The Council apologised to Mrs X and offered a further financial remedy in recognition of the significant stress, uncertainty and financial hardship caused by the other identified delays.

What happened next

43. The Council made a payment to Mrs X in February 2025 in relation to the shortfall in funding. This included a financial remedy to acknowledge the stress and worry regarding the funding payments.
44. Mrs X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s complaint response and brought the complaint to the Ombudsman.
45. Mrs X appealed to the Tribunal regarding the content of Mr X’s EHC Plan.

Analysis – OT and SALT provision

46. The Council acknowledged a delay in implementing the OT and SALT provision as specified by Mr X’s EHC Plan, following the Tribunal’s order. In its response to our enquiries, the Council said it has struggled to identify therapists that will deliver provision which other therapists have assessed, and which has subsequently been directed by the Tribunal. It said commissioned therapy services also have limited capacity to deliver OT and SALT provision. The Council says it is addressing this matter at a strategic level and that this forms part of its transformation plan.
47. I acknowledge the Council’s comments regarding the challenges it experienced in trying to secure this provision. However, legislation is clear that councils have a duty to make sure a child or young person receives the provision set out in their EHC Plan. This duty is non-delegable. Whilst I acknowledge the Council’s comments, the delay incurred regarding this matter is fault.

Delays in providing funding to Mrs X

48. In its complaint response, the Council acknowledged the delays it incurred in releasing funds to Mrs X in respect of the OT and SALT provision she arranged. I agree with the findings of the Council regarding these delays and find the delays identified to be fault. The injustice to Mrs X is stress and uncertainty as to when the Council would make payment for the provision agreed as part of the EHC Plan.

Delays following the annual review

49. Mr X’s EHC Plan underwent an annual review on 12 July 2024. The SEN Code of Practice says councils must issue their decision as to whether to amend, maintain or cease the EHC Plan within four weeks of the annual review meeting. Where councils decide to amend an EHC Plan, they must also provide the proposed changes within this timeframe. Case law further states councils must issue a final amended EHC Plan within a further eight weeks, (within 12 weeks of the annual review meeting).
50. Therefore, the Council should have issued its amendment notice, and the proposed changes, by 9 August 2024 and the final EHC Plan by 4 October 2024. However, the Council issued the amendment notice on 10 October 2024 and the final EHC Plan on 20 December 2024. The Council therefore incurred delays.
51. Mrs X said the Council did not provide a copy of the proposed changes within four weeks of the annual review meeting, or when it issued the amendment notice. To avoid further delay, Mrs X asked the Council to issue the final EHC Plan without first issuing a draft document.
52. The Council acknowledged the above delays in its complaint response. I acknowledge the Council’s comments and its apology to Mrs X. Nevertheless, the delays and the failure to provide the proposed amendments is fault.

The Council’s record keeping

53. In its complaint response to Mrs X, the Council acknowledged its records were unclear as to which providers it consulted regarding the OT and SALT provision for Mr X.
54. I acknowledge the Council’s comments and having reviewed the evidence provided by the Council. I have seen no records to demonstrate which providers the Council consulted with. The Council’s lack of records in this regard is not in accordance with the principles of good administrative practice as referred to in paragraph 22 above. This is fault.

The Council’s communication with Mrs X

55. The Council acknowledged it received a SALT report provided by Mrs X on 24 July 2024. However, the Council said it had no record of its acceptance of the report until 22 October 2024. The evidence provided by the Council supports this timeline.
56. This delay in accepting the SALT report indicates a lack of communication from the Council. Whilst I acknowledge the Council’s apology to Mrs X regarding this matter, I have found the delay to be fault.

Delays in providing payments

57. The Council’s final complaint response acknowledged and apologised for a shortfall in the amounts paid to Mrs X in respect of the privately commissioned OT and SALT provision. The Council confirmed the amounts to be paid to rectify the shortfall. In addition, it acknowledged and apologised for delays in reimbursing agreed expenses.
58. Mrs X has confirmed the Council made a payment to cover the shortfall in February 2025.
59. It is positive the Council has rectified the shortfall. Nevertheless, the delay in making the correct payments in respect of the required provision and agreed expenses is fault.

The Council’s complaint handling

60. Prior to her complaint in October 2024, Mrs X complained to the Council in April, May and July 2024. Mrs X said the Council did not respond to these earlier complaints.
61. In its stage two complaint response, the Council said it had made efforts to address outstanding issues raised by Mrs X. However, it acknowledged its responses were piecemeal and it had not provided full and formal responses to Mrs X’s earlier complaints.
62. Whilst it is positive the Council has itself identified a failure to provide formal complaint responses to Mrs X’s initial complaints, this failure is fault.

Injustice to Mr X and Mrs X

63. Mrs X said Mr X cannot regulate his anxiety without OT support or identify and express his feelings without SALT support. Mrs X says the delays incurred by the Council caused significant, avoidable distress to Mr X. She said Mr X’s mental health suffered significantly and he experienced suicidal thoughts. Mrs X said this, in turn, caused significant distress to her, leaving her feeling helpless, angry and betrayed. In addition, she said the financial strain of covering the cost of therapy and additional expenses was overwhelming. Mrs X said her confidence in the Council has been negatively affected as a result of what she considers to be a pattern of failures. I acknowledge Mrs X’s comments as well as the impact of the Council’s delays on her statutory rights as part of the EHC Plan process.
64. I acknowledge Mrs X’s comments and consider the fault identified caused an injustice to Mr X and Mrs X. I also acknowledge the Council’s apology as part of its complaint response, the payment made in respect of the shortfall, and the financial remedy it offered. The Council said it has invested in a new case file management system and quality assurance tool, and that it has published a revised plan which identifies the actions it is taking to improve its SEND service.
65. I have carefully considered the evidence provided by both parties, including the financial remedy already offered by the Council, alongside our own guidance on remedies. I have also considered the Council’s SEND transformation plan published in September 2021.

Back to top

Action

66. To address the injustice identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within one month of the final decision:
1. Provide a further apology to Mr X and Mrs X for the fault identified. 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;
2. Make a symbolic payment of £300 to Mr X in recognition of the distress caused by the failure to provide him with occupational therapist and speech and language therapist provision;
3. Make a symbolic payment of £300 to Mrs X in recognition of the distress caused by the fault identified following the annual review;
4. Make a further symbolic payment of £100 to Mrs X in recognition of the time, trouble and frustration regarding the delay in reimbursing agreed expenses, and
5. Make a further symbolic payment of £200 to Mrs X in recognition of the time and trouble taken in pursuing her complaint.
67. The Council has also agreed to take the following additional action within three months of the final decision:
1. Review its record keeping processes in relation to its Special Educational Needs, and Education, Health and Care Plan services to ensure they are in accordance with the principles of good administrative practice, and
2. Carry out a review of the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities transformation plan particularly with regard to the commissioning of Special Educational Needs and Disabilities services and therapies support, and the handling of Education, Health and Care Plan reviews.
68. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

69. I found fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take the above actions to remedy the injustice identified and I have therefore concluded my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman