Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed his daughter, Miss Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment. He also complained communication from the Council was poor. Mr X said this frustrated his family. There was fault in the way the Council delayed issuing Miss Y’s EHC Plan, and communication and complaint handling was poor. This frustrated Mr X and his family and frustrated their appeal right to the Tribunal. The Council agreed apologise and make a financial payment.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council delayed his daughter, Miss Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment. He also complained communication from the Council was poor. Mr X said this frustrated his family.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a Council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
4. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read Mr X’s complaint and spoke to him about it on the phone.
6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

8. 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. 
9. Statutory guidance ‘Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years’ (‘the Code’) sets out the process for carrying out EHC assessments and producing EHC Plans. The guidance is based on the Children and Families Act 2014 and the SEN Regulations 2014. It says the following: 

• Where the council receives a request for an EHC needs assessment it must decide whether to agree to the assessment and send its decision to the parent of the child or the young person within six weeks. 
• The process of assessing needs and developing EHC Plans “must be carried out in a timely manner”. Steps must be completed as soon as practicable. 
• If the council goes on to carry out an assessment, it must decide whether to issue an EHC Plan or refuse to issue a Plan within 16 weeks.
• If the council goes on to issue an EHC Plan, the whole process from the point when an assessment is requested until the final EHC Plan is issued must take no more than 20 weeks (unless certain specific circumstances apply);  
• Councils must give the child’s parent or the young person 15 days to comment on a draft EHC Plan and express a preference for an educational placement.

10. As part of the assessment, councils must gather advice from relevant professionals (SEND Regulation 6(1)). This includes: 

• the child’s educational placement; 
• medical advice and information from health care professionals involved with the child; 
• psychological advice and information from an Educational Psychologist (EP); 
• social care advice and information; 
• advice and information from any person requested by the parent or young person, where the council considers it reasonable; and 
• any other advice and information the council considers appropriate for a satisfactory assessment. 

11. There is a right of appeal to the Tribunal against a council’s:

• 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;
• amendment to these elements of an EHC Plan;

12. The courts have established that if someone has appealed to the Tribunal, the law says we cannot investigate any matter which was part of, was connected to, or could have been part of, the appeal to the Tribunal. (R (on application of Milburn) v Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman [2023] EWCA Civ 207)
13. The period we cannot investigate starts from the date the appealable decision is made and given to the parents or young person. If the parent or young person goes on to appeal then the period that we cannot investigate ends when the Tribunal comes to its decision, or if the appeal is withdrawn or conceded. We would not usually look at the period while any changes to the EHC Plan are finalised, so long as the council follows the statutory timescales to make those amendments.
14. The Council complaint policy says it would respond to a complaint within 20 working days.

What happened

15. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
16. Miss Y has complex needs. She previously had an EHC Plan before moving to the Council area. In February 2024, Mr X asked the Council to complete an EHC needs assessment.
17. The Council contacted the Council where the family used to live to check if the EHC Plan was still active. The previous Council confirmed it ceased to maintain the plan when the family moved, three years before.
18. The Council decided to complete the needs assessment in March 2024. The Council asked an EP for their advice and expected a response by April 2024.
19. The EP sent the advice in June 2024. Mr X continued to chase the Council.
20. The Council decided it would issue an EHC Plan in September 2024.
21. Mr X chased the Council in November 2024. The Council issued a draft EHC Plan three days later. Mr X agreed with the plan.
22. The Council sent a number of placement consultations to education settings in December 2024. All education settings stated the Council could name them in the EHC Plan.
23. Mr X continued to chase the Council for an update.
24. Mr X complained to the Council in March 2025. He complained the Council decided it would issue an EHC Plan in September 2024, but it had not, and it had not communicated with the family.
25. The Council issued the final EHC Plan four days later. The plan named a type of setting.
26. The Council issued its final complaint response in May 2025. The Council apologised for the delays issuing the EHC Plan and poor communication.
27. Mr X continued to chase the Council for Miss Y’s preferred placement. The Council agreed to fund the preferred placement in June 2025. The Council issued an updated EHC Plan in July 2025, naming Miss Y’s preferred placement.
28. Mr X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Mr X would like the Council to improve its service.
29. In response to my enquiries the Council accepted it did not issue the plan within the statutory timescale. The Council said it was improving its service with a new strategy.

My findings

30. We expect councils to follow the statutory timescales set out in the law and the code. We are likely to find fault where there are significant breaches of those timescales. Following the needs assessment application, the Council should have decided if it would complete a needs assessment by March 2024. The Council issued this decision a week before the deadline. The Council was not at fault.
31. Council’s must seek EP advice as part of an EHC assessment. This should be received within six weeks of the Council requesting it. The EP’s advice was due in April 2024. The Council received the EP report in June 2024, a two-month delay. The Council is responsible for the commissioning and delivery of the EP advice and information. The delay in receiving the advice was due to a nationwide shortage of EPs. The Ombudsman can make findings of fault where there is a failure to provide a service, regardless of the reasons for that service failure. While I accept there are justifiable reasons the EP advice took longer than it should have, the delay was nonetheless fault.
32. Even after considering the two-month delay in receiving the EP advice, the Council should have issued the plan by August 2024. The Council issued the plan in March 2025. This seven-month Council delay is fault.
33. The Council took 59 weeks to assess Miss Y and issue a final EHC Plan, instead of the 20 weeks required by the regulations and the Code. This nine-month delay is fault.
34. There was an early delay caused by the EP shortage and then a second delay after this before the Council issued the final EHC Plan. This is fault. This frustrated the family and frustrated their appeal right to the Tribunal.
35. I would usually make service improvement recommendations in a case such as this, but I can see other Ombudsman investigations made these. The Ombudsman is actively monitoring the Council’s learning from these recommendations.

Communication and complaint handling

36. The Ombudsman expects a council to keep people informed and respond to them promptly. The Council did not respond to Mr X despite him repeatedly asking for updates. The Council accepted communication was poor. This is fault, frustrating Mr X.
37. The policy, referenced in paragraph 14, states the Council should respond to a complaint in 20 working days, four weeks. The Council took six weeks to respond, a two-week delay. This delay is fault, frustrating Mr X.

Back to top

Action

38. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Mr X and Miss Y by the fault I have identified, the Council agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Mr X and Miss Y for delaying issuing the EHC Plan and poor communications and complaint handling. 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 Mr X £200 to recognise the uncertainty, avoidable distress and frustration caused by the delay in obtaining advice from an EP.
• Pay Mr X £500 to recognise the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by a seven-month delay in issuing Miss Y’s EHC Plan.
39. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

40. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Mr X and Miss Y.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman