Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to secure a college placement for her child or provide them with the correct educational support. We found fault by the Council for failing to secure a college placement for Miss X’s child and for not providing them with support which caused them uncertainty and frustration. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to Miss X and her child to recognise the injustice caused to them by its failings. It also agreed to make changes to its service to prevent the same fault from happening again.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council failed to review her child, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan in time for their transition to a new college placement. She said the Council’s actions left Y without a named college place at the start of the year which caused them uncertainty.
2. Miss X also complained the Council agreed to provide Y with English and maths tuition, but it delayed organising this, which left Y without the support they needed.
3. Miss X said the Council’s communication with her about these matters was poor and increased her frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. 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)
6. 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)
7. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
8. 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)
9. 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

What I have and have not investigated

10. I have investigated how the Council reviewed Y’s EHC Plan ahead of their transition to a new college placement in September 2024. I have also investigated how the Council handled Y’s education in the academic year 2024/25.
11. Miss X also complained about the Council’s actions leading up to Y’s college placement in September 2023 and events during the academic year 2023/24. I have not investigated this part of her complaint, as the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate it.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

12. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
13. Miss 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

Relevant law and guidance

EHC Plans and reviews

14. A child or young person with Special Educational Needs (SEN) may have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This document sets out the child or young person’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them.
15. Councils must arrange for the EHC Plan to be reviewed at least once a year to make sure it is up to date. The review begins with consulting the child’s parents or the young person and the educational placement. A review meeting must then take place. The process is only complete when the council issues its decision to amend, maintain or cease to maintain the EHC Plan. This must happen within four weeks of the meeting. (Section 20(10) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.176) 
16. Where the council proposes to amend an EHC Plan, the law says it must send the child’s parent or the young person a copy of the existing (non-amended) Plan and an accompanying notice providing details of the proposed amendments, including copies of any evidence to support the proposed changes. (Section 22(2) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.194). Case law sets out this should happen within four weeks of the date of the review meeting. Councils must issue the final amended EHC Plan within a further eight weeks of sending the proposed amended EHC Plan. (Section 22(3) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014)
17. There is a right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) 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 final amended EHC Plan. There is no right of appeal against a draft or proposed amended EHC Plan.
18. An EHC plan must be reviewed and amended in sufficient time prior to a child or young person moving between key phases of education, to allow for planning for and, where necessary, commissioning of support and provision at the new institution. (SEN Code paragraph 9.179)
19. For young people moving between post-16 institutions, the council should normally complete the review process by 31 March where a young person is expected to transfer to a new institution in the new academic year. In all cases, where a young person is planning to transfer between one post-16 institution and another within the following 12 months, the council must review and amend, where necessary, the young person’s EHC Plan. This must be at least five months before the transfer takes place.  (SEN Code paragraph 9.181)
20. Councils can request that education settings hold review meetings on their behalf, but councils have the legal duty for ensuring reviews are completed in line with the law.

Principles of Good Administrative Practice

21. The Ombudsman has published guidance called Principles of Good Administrative Practice.
22. We use this as a benchmark for the standards we expect when we investigate complaints about councils. The principles include:

• Keeping to commitments, including any published service standards.
• Keeping proper and appropriate records.
• Taking responsibility for actions.

What happened

Y’s college placement in September 2024

23. During the academic year of 2023/24, Y was not attending a college.
24. In early June 2024 the Council held a review of Y’s EHC Plan.
25. Later in June 2024 the Council sent Miss X a proposed amended EHC Plan for Y. In early July 2024 Miss X agreed to the proposed changes of Y’s EHC Plan. At this time, there was no agreed college placement for Y to attend in September 2024.
26. In late June 2024 the Council started contacting colleges to ask if they could offer Y a place in September 2024.
27. Miss X also continued to explore college placements for Y. In August 2024, she told the Council which college Y wished to attend.
28. By the start of September 2024, the Council had still not agreed funding for Y’s college placement. Y started at college without the Council’s agreement.
29. In late September 2024 the Council agreed the funding for the college. It sent Y a letter telling them this in early October 2024.
30. The Council did not send a further amended EHC Plan for Y.
31. The Council held another review of Y’s EHC Plan in February 2025. As of February 2026, the Council had not sent a final amended EHC Plan following this review.

Y’s English and Maths tuition

32. In 2024 Miss X asked the Council if it would pay for Y to have English and maths tuition, because Y needed extra help with this.
33. In September 2024 the Council agreed it would pay for this tuition. However, it failed to tell Miss X about its decision until March 2025.
34. The Council started paying for English and maths tuition for Y in March 2025.

Analysis

Y’s college placement in September 2024

35. Y was not attending a college before their move to a new college in September 2024, so they were not moving between colleges as described in the SEN Code of Practice. However, it still would have been good practice to review Y’s plan earlier in the year so there was enough time to ensure their transition to their new college was well-managed.
36. In Y’s case, the Council did not start contacting colleges for Y to attend until late June 2024, leaving only two months to find a college placement and plan Y’s transition before their course started. The Council did not confirm a college placement for Y until October 2024. This was fault.
37. This fault left Y and Miss X with uncertainty and frustration, as they did not know which college Y would be attending in September 2024. Y has additional needs which means they struggle with transitions and their proposed amended EHC Plan said they need well-managed transitions.
38. However, this injustice to Y was limited because Miss X decided to send them to college without waiting for the Council’s agreement first. Because Miss X did this, Y started a college placement in September 2024 and did not miss any education at the start of the new academic year.

Y’s EHC Plan reviews

39. The Council did not send a final amended EHC Plan for Y after the June 2024 annual review meeting. This was fault.
40. The Council reviewed Y’s EHC Plan in February 2025 but did not send a final amended EHC Plan following this. This was also fault.
41. These faults caused injustice to Y and Miss X because Y’s EHC Plan is likely not up to date and they have been denied any opportunity to appeal the content of the EHC Plans to the Tribunal.

Y’s English and maths tuition

42. The Council agreed to provide English and maths tuition for Y in September 2024. However, it did not do this until March 2025, which was fault.
43. This fault caused injustice to Y because they did not get a service the Council agreed they needed.

Communication

44. Miss X complained the Council’s communication with her was poor.
45. The Council has sent us evidence of its communication with Miss X during the period I have investigated.
46. On balance, I am satisfied the Council kept in regular contact with Miss X and, apart from failing to tell her its decision about Y’s tuition, communicated most relevant information to her and Y.
47. However, there was fault in the Council’s case-handling overall, as identified in this decision, and I accept that this would have seemed like poor communication to Miss Y. Therefore, Miss X likely experienced frustration and uncertainty due to the Council’s case-handling faults.

Record keeping

48. We asked the Council to send us information so we could investigate this complaint. The Council said it did not hold complete records from two of Y’s EHC Plan reviews.
49. Our Principles of Good Administrative Practice say keeping proper and appropriate records enables Councils to be open and accountable. Not keeping complete records of Y’s EHC reviews was therefore fault.
50. This fault caused injustice to Y and Miss X because it prevented us from being able to review all of the documents relevant to their complaint, causing them uncertainty.

Personal remedy

51. Where we find fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. When deciding remedies, we refer to our guidance on remedies.
52. In Miss X and Y’s case, I have considered that an apology and a symbolic payment for distress is appropriate to remedy their injustice. This is to recognise the frustration, uncertainty and loss of service caused to them by the Council failing to secure a college placement by September 2024 and delaying its arranging of tuition for Y.
53. We normally recommend a symbolic payment for distress of up to £500, but we may recommend more if we decide someone’s distress was prolonged, or if the person was vulnerable.
54. I have considered the following when deciding an appropriate remedy to recommend:

• Y’s particular needs around well-managed transitions;
• that Y did not miss the start of their course in September 2024;
• that Y was still attending English and maths lessons when they weren’t receiving extra tuition, so they were still able to access English and maths learning; and,
• that Y did not get six months of agreed tuition which is a significant amount.

55. In Y’s case, an £800 remedy payment is appropriate due to their vulnerability and the prolonged time they went without tuition.

Service improvements

56. Where we find fault by an organisation, we can recommend changes to improve how the organisation delivers its services to prevent the same issue happening to others.
57. The Council sent us a copy of its annual review process. The document does not explain how the Council will ensure that it (or educational institutions on its behalf) will arrange and complete EHC Plan reviews ahead of key phase transfers. This could result in the Council failing to meet its legal deadlines to complete key phase transfer EHC Plan reviews in other cases.
58. The Council has agreed to make changes to its service (see paragraph 60) to prevent similar issues from happening to others.

Back to top

Action

59. Within one month of our decision, the Council will:
1. apologise to Miss X and Y for the injustice caused to them by the failings identified during this investigation. This apology should be in accordance with our guidance for making an effective apology;
2. pay Miss X and Y £800 to recognise the uncertainty, frustration and loss of service caused to them by the Council’s delay in arranging an EHC Plan review and delay in arranging tuition for Y; and
3. arrange and hold a fresh review meeting of Y’s EHC Plan, if it has not completed a review of Y’s EHC Plan within the last 12 months. After it holds the review meeting, the Council should pay particular attention to the legal deadlines for completing reviews of EHC Plans and, if relevant, sending out final amended EHC Plans.
60. Within three months of our decision, the Council will:
1. review its process for EHC Plan reviews. It will decide if it needs to amend its EHC Plan review process to ensure that it can meet the legal deadlines for reviews when children and young people are moving between phases of education or post-16 institutions. It will identify any changes it needs to make to its process and then send us a timebound action plan of when it intends to make those changes; and
2. through training or a staff briefing, remind staff of the need to keep records of all EHC Plan review documents on children and young people’s case files.
61. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

62. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman