Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Council assessing Mrs X’s child’s special educational needs. This is because the Council agreed a suitable remedy for the distress and extra costs Mrs X incurred.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about delays in the Education Health and Care assessment process for her child in 2024. She says the Council took too long to complete the assessment, because of the delays in obtaining education psychologist advice.
2. Mrs X eventually arranged and paid for her own EP report, which the Council used for its assessment. She wants the Council to properly acknowledge the impact of the delay and repay her the cost of the report.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. If we investigated this complaint, it is likely we would find the Council at fault because it took too long to assess Y’s special educational needs and to issue an Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan for them.
7. Councils must issue a final EHC Plan within 20 weeks of the request for an assessment of a child or young person’s special educational needs. Mrs X asked the Council for an assessment in late June 2024. The Council issued Y’s EHC Plan in late May 2025, around six and a half months late.
8. The Council accepted there were delays obtaining educational psychology (EP) advice (due to a shortage of educational psychologists) and it only completed the assessment after Mrs X obtained her own EP report, which she paid for herself. It apologised to Mrs X and paid her £150 to recognise the delays.
9. Although the delays were not within the Council’s control, it still failed to obtain educational psychology advice and issue Y’s EHC Plan within the legal timescales. We would likely find this to be service failure and therefore fault. However, we would likely not consider the remedy the Council has already offered is suitable.
10. We therefore asked the Council to remedy the injustice caused to Mrs X by the delays by paying her £650 (less any remedy payment it has already paid) and reimbursing her for the cost of the EP report she paid for.

Back to top

Action

11. The Council agreed, within one month of my decision, to:
• pay Mrs X £650 (less any payment is has already made) to recognise the distress caused by the delays; and
• on receipt of suitable evidence, repay Mrs X the cost of the educational psychology report it used when preparing Y’s EHC plan.
12. The Council already has a plan in place to improve access to educational psychology advice, so no further service improvements are necessary at this time.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We have upheld this complaint because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mrs X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman