Surrey County Council (25 002 182)

Category : Education > Special educational needs

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 12 Aug 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We cannot investigate Ms M’s complaint about her son B’s education because she appealed to the SEND Tribunal and we cannot investigate a complaint when someone has appealed to the Tribunal about the same matter.

The complaint

  1. Ms M complains about her son B’s education. B has an education, health and care (EHC) plan maintained by the Council. B needed a special school, but he remained at a mainstream primary school with additional support.
  2. Ms M wants the Council provide compensation and catch-up for the special educational provision he has missed by not having a special school place, and compensation for the impact on herself, including her earnings.
  3. She complains B has suffered distress, anxiety and self-injurious behaviour as a result of the Council’s failure to meet his needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
  3. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the SEND Tribunal in this decision statement.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Ms M and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. We previously investigated a complaint about B’s education up to April 2024.
  2. Ms M is unhappy with our decision. She says a friend complained to us and received considerably more compensation that she did. Ms M challenged our decision at the time. We reviewed our decision but found no grounds to recommend a higher payment. It is too late to challenge that decision now.
  3. This complaint is about what happened next.
  4. Ms M complained to the Council on 29 November 2024. She complained about delay reviewing B’s EHC Plan. The Council had sent a final Plan on 13 June 2024. This was two weeks late, and the Council apologised. Ms M said she had not received the Plan in June, so the Council sent it again.
  5. Ms M complained to the Council again on 3 May 2025. The Council had issued a further EHC Plan on 14 February 2025, but B was still without the special school place he needed. The Council declined to respond to Ms M’s complaint because she had appealed to the SEND Tribunal.
  6. Unhappy with the situation, Ms M complained to us at the same time.
  7. I completely understand why Ms M was unhappy. Everyone agreed B needed a special school place in August 2023, but he was still without one almost two years later.
  8. Ms M appealed sections B, F and I of the 14 February 2025 EHC Plan to the SEND Tribunal. We cannot investigate complaints if someone has appealed to the Tribunal about the same matter. This means I cannot consider Ms M’s complaints about any matters relating to B’s special educational needs (described in section B), the special educational provision (set out in section F) and the school he attended (named in section I).
  9. The Tribunal allowed Ms M’s appeal, made the changes she requested to B’s Plan, and named the special school she wanted in section I.
  10. Ms M complained delays in the reviews of B’s EHC Plan delayed her right of appeal. Ms M appealed the 14 February 2025 Plan. We will not investigate her complaint about delayed reviews because she could have appealed the June 2024 Plan and explained to the Tribunal why her appeal was late.
  11. We can only consider whether the Council arranged the provision in B’s EHC Plan. I understand the Plan said B should have 1:1 support while he remained in a mainstream primary school. Ms M complains he shared a 1:1 support assistant with other pupils. We considered this the last time Ms M complained to us. We advised Ms M to raise her concerns directly with the school.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint because she appealed to the SEND Tribunal and we cannot investigate a complaint when someone has appealed to the Tribunal about the same matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings