Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about Council delays in completing her child’s Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment. The Council upheld the complaint and has agreed to remedy Ms X’s injustice by apologising and offering a financial remedy. Further investigation by us would not be proportionate.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council:
1. failed to complete her child, Q’s Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment (EHCNA) within the statutory timescales for doing so, which delayed the Council sending the final Plan;
2. failed, since February 2024, to provide a school placement or suitable alternative provision for Q; and,
3. failed to seek advice from a speech and language therapist and Q’s community paediatrician before issuing Q’s first final Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan).

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

5. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
6. 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

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Ms X complains about Council action from February 2024. Ms X first complained to the Ombudsman in June 2025, meaning, usually, we would not consider issues that occurred before June 2024. I have seen no good reasons to exercise discretion, meaning I have considered matters from June 2024.
10. In August 2024, the Council issued Q’s first EHC Plan. In its complaint responses, the Council accepted it failed to issue this within the statutory timescales. To remedy the injustice caused to Ms X by the delays, it apologised and offered a financial remedy of £250. I am satisfied the Council has provided a suitable remedy for any injustice Ms X has suffered. I also note that it told Ms X that its EHC Assessment Team had more staff with increased capacity to respond to EHCNA requests. For these reasons, it is unlikely an investigation would add to the Council’s previous investigation or lead to a different outcome.
11. The Council was not under a duty to secure the provision in Q’s Plan before it finalised the Plan. Similarly, the Council’s duty to arrange suitable full-time education for children who cannot attend school due to, for example, illness or other reasons, only applies to children of compulsory school age. Q was below compulsory school age prior to the Council issuing the first EHC Plan, meaning the Council’s duty does not apply here. For these reasons, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating.
12. We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council failed to arrange a school placement or the special educational provision set out in Q’s EHC Plans from August onwards. These matters overlap with Ms X’s two consecutive SEND Tribunal appeals about Q’s school placement and the adequacy of the provision in Section F of the Plan.
13. We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about the lack of advice and information from a speech and language therapist and Q's diagnosing paediatrician. The injustice caused by this lack of advice would be that the EHC Plan does not meet Q’s needs, which is the subject of Ms X’s appeals. The SEND Tribunal has wide powers to order the completion of reports. Ms X could refer the matter to the Tribunal to resolve. I cannot look at matters that overlap with the Tribunal’s role.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about Council delays in completing her child’s Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment. The Council upheld the complaint and has agreed to suitable remedies. Further investigation by us would therefore not be proportionate.
15. We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council failed to arrange a suitable school placement or alternative educational provision for her child. These matters overlap with SEND Tribunal appeals about her child’s EHC Plan.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman