Summary: Ms Y complained about the way the Council dealt with her child’s special educational needs and educational provision. Her complaints included the implementation of provision in the Education Health and Care Plan and the Council’s communication about this. We have not found fault with the Council.

The complaint

1. Ms Y complains about the way the Council has dealt with her child, Z’s special educational needs (SEN) and educational provision. She says the Council failed to:

1. properly implement all the provision in Z’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. It wrongly removed some of Z’s provision, stopped their 1:1 support and failed to provide any speech and language therapy (SALT);
2. action the recommendations in the occupational therapy (OT) report. It failed to provide Z with the recommended desk and chair or update Z’s EHC Plan to include the OT recommendations;
3. properly explain the process for reimbursement of payments she’d made for Z’s guitar lessons;
4. communicate properly with her about Z’s SEN and educational provision. The caseworker failed to respond to her contact. Z’s 1:1 mentor failed to communicate in a timely way and then stopped communicating; and
5. make reasonable adjustments in its communications with her.

2. Ms Y says, because of the Council’s failures, Z did not receive the support and provision to which they were entitled, impacting their education and wellbeing. She has been caused extreme stress through having to battle for Z’s support and oversee their provision.
3. She wants the Council to put things right by: providing someone to properly oversee Z’s provision and 1:1 support; updating Z’s EHC Plan; providing the OT recommended equipment; and properly explain in a call the process for reimbursement of the cost of guitar lessons. She also wants the Council to apologise and make financial redress for its failings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these.
5. 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)
6. 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

7. I have investigated what happened in the period from December 2024 to the end of April 2025 concerning the issues raised by Ms Y in her complaint to the Council, to which it provided its final response before she brought her complaint to us in May 2025.
8. I have not investigated any further concerns raised by Ms Y after the Council’s final response, including her complaint about communication with the 1:1 mentor. This is because these are new issues which should be considered first through the Council’s own complaints process.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Ms Y and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Ms Y 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

What should have happened

Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan

11. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an EHC Plan. This document sets out their needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them.
12. 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.
13. 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. 
14. 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).

Appeal rights

15. There is a right of appeal to the Tribunal against a number of a council’s decisions about a child or young person’s SEN provision.
16. This includes decisions about the description of a child or young person’s SEN, the special educational provision specified, the school or placement or that no school or other placement is specified in their EHC Plan.
17. Councils must arrange for a child’s parents or the young person to receive information about mediation as an informal way to resolve disputes about decisions that can be appealed to the Tribunal.

What happened

18. I have set out a summary of the key events below. It is not meant to show everything that happened. It is based on my review of all the evidence provided about this complaint.

Background

19. Z has an EHC Plan. The Council agreed to provide them with a package of Education Otherwise Than at School (EOTAS). The SEN and EOTAS provision the Council agreed to make for Z was set out in section F of their final EHC Plan issued in December 2023.
20. The Council carried out the annual review of Z’s EHC Plan in 2024. During the review, in November 2024, the Council arranged a call with Ms Y as she had requested, to discuss Z’s provision.
21. Following this call, it sent Ms Y the proposed personal budget for provision in section F of Z’s Plan. It asked her to check this included all the items she wanted the Council to consider for inclusion in the Plan. It confirmed the proposed personal budget would then be referred to its SEND Panel in December 2024.

December 2024: Z’s final amended EHC Plan

22. The Panel considered the proposed provision and personal budget and made its decisions about the items to be included in Z’s provision in section F of the EHC Plan.
23. The Council told Ms Y about the Panel’s decisions by email on 11 December. It confirmed Z’s EHC Plan had now been finalised and was attached together with a letter explaining what she should do if she disagreed with anything in the Plan.
24. The Council also attached the decision record setting out the Panel’s reasons for agreeing or declining the items in the proposed personal budget. It told Ms Y the Panel had agreed funding for the following:

• dyslexia assessment
• an increase in tuition hours
• guitar lessons. It said reimbursement for the lessons would be made to Ms Y through personal budget payments. It asked about tutor invoices for these lessons
• prodigy maths for the year 24/25
• duo lingo
• gym membership. It said a payment of £270 had been made in July 2024 towards this cost. It asked when the membership was due to be renewed.

25. Section F of the December 2024 final Plan set out the following SEN and EOTAS provision the Council had agreed to make for Z:

• small group online tuition weekly with an agreed tutor in english, maths, history, philosophy and journalism (term time)
• use of online learning packages such as prodigy maths and duo lingo
• mentoring activities with gaming and coding activities twice weekly with a provider such as mind jam (term time)
• weekly mentor sessions (term time)
• 1:1 guitar lessons weekly (term time)
• access to a local gym facility

26. The covering letter told Ms Y about her right to appeal to the Tribunal if she disagreed with what was in the Plan.

Ms Y’s contact with the Council about the final EHC Plan

27. Ms Y asked the Council on 11 December why some items in her proposed personal budget had not been included in section F of the Plan. She requested a meeting to discuss this.
28. In its response to Ms Y on 16 December the Council told her:

• it had set out the process she should follow if she disagreed with the content of Z’s EHC Plan in the letter sent with the final plan; and
• how she could contact the SEND Information and Advice Service (SENDIASS) for independent support and how to appeal through mediation or the Tribunal. It also reminded her about the time limit for appeals.

29. Ms Y contacted the Council again in January 2025 with further questions about why some of her requested provision had not been included in the Plan. She also asked how she could claim re-imbursement for the guitar lessons.
30. The Council replied by email. It said its finance team would arrange reimbursement once she had provided the tutor’s invoice. It also referred her to its response of 16 December about the provision in final Plan.
31. Ms Y asked the Council for a meeting. The Council told her the case had been referred to a manager who would contact her.

January to March 2025: OT assessment

32. Z’s OT assessment was completed on 29 January. The OT’s report was sent to the Council and Ms Y on 28 February.
33. The Council obtained quotes for the recommended support sessions. It told Ms Y on 19 March it would submit the quote to its Panel for approval. It also advised her to obtain a quote for the recommended equipment so this could also be referred for Panel approval.
34. The Council agreed the funding for Z’s OT sessions on 20 March.

March 2025: Ms Y’s complaint to the Council

35. Ms Y made a formal complaint to the Council on 17 March about the way it was dealing with Z’s SEN and educational provision. She said the Council:

• had not contacted her or responded about Z’s case;
• still hadn’t told her how to recover the cost of Z’s guitar lessons. She had asked it for a phone call to explain this. She has disabilities and sometimes struggled with processes;
• had not explained why some items previously included in Z’s Plan were removed in December 2024;
• had not given her any support for the personal budget; and
• had not actioned the OT recommendations for Z’s equipment and support.

36. In its stage one complaint response to Ms Y on 20 March, the Council said:

• Z’s current EHC Plan set out the content of Z’s current EOTAS package agreed by the Council. Any requests for additional provision would have to be made through a personal budget request and referred to the Panel for approval;
• it had explained the process for reimbursement of the payments for guitar lessons in its emails of 9 December 2024 and 7 February 2025. It asked her to send the relevant invoices, and it would arrange to process the refund;
• it attached the Panel decision record for her personal budget request;
• it was obtaining a quote for the recommended OT support. This would then be referred to the Panel for approval and it would update her about the outcome;
• SENDIASS could provide her with additional support. It provided their contact details; and
• she had the right to seek independent disagreement resolution if she was unhappy with agreed provision in the EHC Plan. It confirmed who she should contact to do this.

March/April: Council’s final complaint response

37. In her reply to the Council, Ms Y said:

• she had explained her disabilities and should not have to be responsible for dealing with Z’s provision;
• it had ignored her complaint about its refusal to have calls with her about this complicated process;
• she had asked for an OT assessment two years ago. The equipment recommended in the recent report had still not been provided. The Council had not contacted her about this; and
• previously agreed Items had been removed from Z’s EHC Plan.

38. In its final, stage two complaint response on 1 April the Council told Ms Y:

• how to contact SENDIASS for support with issues concerning Z’s EOTAS package and provision;
• details of the process she should follow to challenge the contents of the final Plan had been provided;
• funding for Z’s OT sessions had been agreed, and OT had advised her directly about getting an up-to-date quote for equipment. It confirmed the email address for submitting the quote which would be referred to the Panel for approval. Relevant information from the OT assessment could be added to Z’s EHC Plan at the next review; and
• she should request a review of Z’s EHC Plan if she wanted to ask for changes to the provision in section F of the current Plan.

April/May 2025: Ms Y’s further contact with the Council

39. Ms Y contacted the Council in April/May about issues concerning Z’s 1:1 mentor support, the OT report and OT equipment.
40. On 30 April the Council offered to arrange a call with Ms Y to discuss the issues.
41. Ms Y brought her complaint to us in May.

Events following Ms Y’s complaint to us

42. The Council has told us:

• it has been in contact with Ms Y, and her solicitors in response to their pre-action protocol letters and request for a review of Z’s EHC plan;
• it held a review meeting of Z’s EHC Pan in July 2025. It sent Ms Y a draft amended EHC Plan. This has not yet been finalised as Ms Y had asked for further changes;
• Z’s OT sessions were scheduled to start in November 2025;
• Ms Y provided an invoice for Z’s guitar lessons. The Council has reimbursed her for these payments;
• its Panel agreed to the funding request for SALT sessions for Z. These started in Autumn 2025; and
• 1:1 mentor sessions are included in Z’s current timetable.

My decision – was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

a) Failure to properly implement all the provision in Z’s EHC Plan

43. Ms Y’s request for specific provision included in the proposed personal budget was considered by its Panel in December 2024. The agreed provision was then set out in section F of Z’s final EHC Plan.
44. I understand Ms Y was unhappy that some of the items she had requested or which had previously been provided were not included in Z’s Plan. But, as the Council explained at the time and in response to her complaints, any challenge to the content of Z’s Plan would have to made through mediation or by appeal to the Tribunal. It provided her with information about how do this.
45. I have not seen any information showing the Council failed to implement the provision it had agreed to make for Z – as set out in section F of their December 2024 Plan. My understanding is this agreed provision did not include SALT.
46. I have not found fault with the Council on this part of Ms Y’s complaint.

b) Failure to action the recommendations in the OT report

47. The OT report was sent to the Council and Ms Y at the end of February 2025.
48. By March 2025, the Council had approved funding for six OT sessions for Z and explained how payment for the recommended equipment would be agreed when Ms Y provided a quote for its cost.
49. I consider the Council acted promptly to action the OT recommendations. I have not found fault with it on this part of the complaint.

Failure to properly explain reimbursement for Z’s guitar lessons

50. The Council explained clearly how Ms Y could claim re-imbursement of her payments for Z’s guitar lessons by providing the tutor’s invoice for these. It gave her the email address to send the invoice to and confirmed its finance team would then arrange the refund.
51. It offered, on 30 April 2025, to arrange a call with her to discuss a number of issues. I don’t know if Ms Y pursued this. But I note she has now been reimbursed for the cost of the guitar lessons after providing the appropriate invoice.
52. I consider the Council responded properly to Ms Y’s requests about the reimbursement process. I have not found fault with the Council on this part of the complaint.

Failure to communicate properly about Z’s provision

53. I have reviewed the Council’s contact with Ms Y about Z’s SEN and educational provision from December 2024 to the end of April 2025.
54. In my view, it provided Ms Y with clear information about its decisions, the provision it had agreed to make for Z and what she should do if she was unhappy with the content of Z’s EHC Plan.
55. It also responded promptly to Ms Y’s concerns and questions and provided full and prompt responses to her complaints.
56. I don’t consider there was any failure by the Council to communicate properly with Ms Y about Z’s provision. I have not found fault with it on this part of the complaint.

Failure to make reasonable adjustments in its communications

57. I haven’t seen any request by Ms Y for adjustments to the Council’s communication with her aside from her requests for a telephone call.
58. The Council arranged to speak to Ms Y in November 2024 about the proposed personal budget in response to her specific request for a call about this.
59. I note Ms Y also asked, in February 2025, for a call or meeting with the Council. It did not respond to this request initially. But I can’t see Ms Y told the Council, until her complaint in March 2025, she needed a phone call because she sometimes struggled with processes due to her disabilities.
60. The Council advised Ms Y that SENDIASS could provide support for her with SEN processes. And it offered her a call in April 2025 to discuss the issues she had raised. In my view any initial delay by the Council in responding to Ms Y’s request for a call was remedied by this offer.
61. I don’t consider the Council failed to respond to a request by Ms Y for reasonable adjustments to its communication with her. I have not found fault with the Council on this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Decision

62. I have not found fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman