Summary: There has been delay by the Council in putting in place the provisions in Section F of an Education, Health and Care Plan. This was fault. An apology, putting in place the provision, and making a symbolic payment remedies the injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains the Council has not put in place the provision in Section F of the Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for her child, Y. Ms X says that her child has missed out on education and therapy.

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 Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Ms X 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

7. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an 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 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. This means if the council asks another organisation to make the provision and that organisation fails to do so, the council remains liable (R v London Borough of Harrow ex parte M [1997] ELR 62), (R v North Tyneside Borough Council [2010] EWCA Civ 135)  
9. Y had an EHC Plan that named Education Other Than At School (EOTAS) on 4 December 2024. Ms X complains about the delay by the Council in putting in place the provision in the plan.
10. Ms X emailed the Council on 11 January 2025. She said that no one had contacted her to co-ordinate the EOTAS package, as the EHC Plan specified. She explained that Y’s old school was funding a tutor and equine provision and that she was funding Mindjam.
11. The Council has said the equine provision started in February 2025 and a Personal Budget agreement in April 2025 put in place tuition and a stationary budget. Mindjam also started in April 2025. An EOTAS co-ordinator was also put in place.
12. Mrs X told me in December 2025 that the personal budget has been set up. She would like the Council to confirm that Mindjam have been paid for all the sessions. Ms X said there is still no mentoring, Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) and Occupational Therapy (OT) in place.
13. The Council has accepted there has been a delay in putting the EHC Plan provisions in place. It has suggested a symbolic payment of £1500 for the missed education and OT from December 2024 until July 2025 and £250 for the missed provision for September to December 2025.
14. Our guidance on remedies says ‘where fault has resulted in a loss of educational provision, we will usually recommend a remedy payment of between £900 to £2,400 per term to acknowledge the harm caused by that loss. The figure should  be based on the impact on the child and take account of whether any educational provision, full time or part time, without some or all of the specified support was made during the period. The symbolic payment of £900 - £2,400 per term is intended to remedy injustice caused to the child from missing provision, as well as the normal range of consequential injustice also caused to the family due to  this fault, for example; where there is significant additional caring responsibilities that occur from a child being out of education, and avoidable disruption to daily routine’.
15. The information I have shows that there was very little educational provision in place until April 2025 other than the equine therapy and Mindjam. So, I propose a symbolic payment of £2400 for this period of just over a term.
16. From May 2025 until December 2025 there has been educational provision in place, but no mentoring, SALT or OT. This is two terms and I propose a symbolic payment of £900 per term, totalling £1800.
17. I have not made service improvements as the Council is already working to put them in place from other complaints to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Action

18. Within one month of the date of the decision on this complaint the Council should:
• Apologise to Ms X. 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.
• Pay Ms X £4200.
• Confirm that Mindjam has been paid for the provision from January to August 2025.
19. Within two months of the date of the decision on this complaint the Council should:
• Put in place the missing provision from Section F of the EHC Plan. (Mentoring, SALT and OT.)
20. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

21. I have completed my investigation and I find fault causing injustice. This complaint is upheld. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman