Summary: Mrs B complained the Council delayed in completing an annual review for her child, X. We have found the Council at fault for a delay in completing the annual review and issuing a final complaint response. This caused Mrs B distress, frustration and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to remedy the injustice caused by the faults.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complained the Council failed to follow the statutory process for completing her child, X’s, annual review in March 2024 and it communicated poorly during this time. Mrs B also complained the Council failed to investigate her complaint and complete the actions detailed in the complaint response. Mrs B says these faults mean X’s Education, Health and Care Plan is not up to date, her appeal rights have been delayed, and the process has caused her significant stress and wasted time. Mrs B would like the Council to investigate the original complaint properly and provide an apology and explanation as to why the faults occurred.

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. 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)
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 evidence provided by Mrs B and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mrs B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

Education Health and Care Plans

7. 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. 
8. 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 maintain or discontinue the EHC Plan, or when it issues the final amended Plan if its decision is to amend the Plan following the review. The Council must issue its decision within four weeks of the meeting. (Section 20(10) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.176) 
9. If the council decides not to amend an EHC Plan or decides to cease to maintain it, it must inform the child’s parents or the young person of their right to appeal the decision to the tribunal.
10. 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.

Council complaints policy

11. The Council has a published complaints policy which sets out a two stage process for dealing with complaints.
12. At stage one the Council allow the allocated investigate 20 working days to investigate the complaint. This timeframe starts from the day the Council accept the complaint and allocate it to an investigator.
13. At stage two of the investigation the Council allocates the complaint to a senior manager who is allowed 25 working days to complete the stage two review.

What happened

Annual review

14. The Council issued a final amended EHC Plan for X at the beginning of July 2023. This means it should have completed the next review no later than the beginning of July 2024.
15. The Council contacted Mrs B in August 2024 to arrange the annual review meeting for X. The annual review meeting took place in September 2024, and the final amended Plan was issued within 8 weeks, at the end of October 2024.

Complaint handling

16. In August 2024 Mrs B submitted a stage one complaint to the Council. Mrs B complained:
• The Council failed to hold X’s annual review within the statutory timeframe.
• The Council had failed to update Mrs B’s data protection preferences.
17. The Council issued a stage one response which upheld that the annual review had not been completed within the statutory timeframe. The Council apologised to Mrs B and told her the key worker would be in touch to arrange the annual review meeting.
18. The Council also acknowledged it had failed to update Mrs B’s data protection preferences and confirmed this had been completed following Mrs B’s complaint.
19. Mrs B asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage two of its complaints process on the same day she received the stage one complaint response in August 2024.
20. The Council did not issue a stage two complaint response until the end of January 2025.

My findings

21. The Council delayed in arranging X’s annual review. This meant X’s EHC Plan was not updated until October 2024, which is a 3 month delay. This is fault which caused Mrs B distress, frustration and uncertainty and delayed Mrs B’s right to appeal.
22. The Council failed to complete the stage two complaint review within 25 working days. Mrs B escalated her complaint in August 2024 and did not receive a response until the end of January 2025. This is a delay of approximately 4 months. This is fault which caused Mrs B distress, frustration, uncertainty and unnecessary time and trouble chasing the Council for a response.
23. In response to our enquiries the Council told us it has taken steps to improve internal tracking and scheduling processes to prevent similar delays recurring. The Council also told us it has reaffirmed its commitment to working collaboratively with families and ensuring statutory compliance in all future EHCP processes. For this reason, I have not recommended any further service improvements.

Back to top

Action

24. Within one month of the final decision the Council will:
• Apologise to Mrs B for the injustice caused by the faults identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making its apology.
• Make a symbolic payment of £400 to Mrs B. This is calculated at £250 in recognition of the injustice caused by the delay in completing Y’s annual review and £150 in recognition of the injustice caused by the faults in the Council’s complaint handling.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman