Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s failure to issue and amended Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan within the legal timeframe. We found the Council to be at fault. This caused Mrs X distress and frustration. To remedy this injustice, the Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment. We did not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the content of the draft and final EHC Plans because this was appealable to a tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council took too long to issue her child’s amended Education, Health and Care Plan following an annual review.
2. She also complaint about the Council’s failure to include relevant information in the Education, Health and Care Plan.
3. This caused distress and frustration to Mrs X.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (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.
7. 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.
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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

9. Paragraphs 19 to 21 apply to this complaint
10. I have not investigated Mrs X’s complaint about the Council failure to include relevant information in the EHC Plan. I consider it reasonable for Mrs X to have exercised her right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal in July 2025. This is because the SEND Tribunal is the most appropriate forum to achieve the outcome sought by Mrs X.
11. I understand Mrs X is unhappy about the outcome of the mediation that took place after the final EHC Plan was issued. This took place after Mrs X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman and so I am unable to investigate this. She should raise a formal complaint with the Council about this matter in the first instance.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Legal and administrative background

Education Health and Care Plans

14. A child with special educational needs may have an Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them.

Reviewing EHC Plans

15. The council must arrange for the EHC Plan to be reviewed at least once a year to make sure it is up to date. A review meeting must take place. The Council must inform the parent within four weeks whether it intends to maintain or amend the EHC Plan.

16. When changes are suggested to the draft EHC Plan and agreed by the Council, it should amend the draft plan and issue the final EHC Plan as quickly as possible, and within eight weeks of the date the Council send the proposed amendments to the parents.
17. Where a Council does not agree the changes suggested by the child’s parent it may still proceed to issue the final EHC Plan.
18. In any case the Council must notify the child’s parent of their right to appeal to the Tribunal and the time limit for doing so.

SEND Tribunal and appeal rights

19. There is a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal against the special educational provision specified, the school or placement or that no school or other placement is specified.
20. Due to the restrictions on our powers to investigate where there is an appeal right, there will be cases where there has been past injustice which neither we, nor the SEND Tribunal, can remedy. The courts have found that the fact a complainant will be left without a remedy does not mean we can investigate a complaint. (R (ER) v Commissioner for Local Administration, ex parte Field) 1999 EWHC 754 (Admin)
21. This means that if a child or young person is not attending school, and we decide the reason for non-attendance is linked to, or is a consequence of, a parent or young person’s disagreement about the special educational provision or the educational placement in the EHC Plan, we cannot investigate a lack of special educational provision, or alternative educational provision.

What happened

22. Below is a summary of the key events leading to this investigation. It is not an exhaustive chronology of every exchange between parties. Where necessary, I have expanded on some of these events in the “Analysis” section of this decision statement.
23. Mrs X’s child (Y) has SEN and an EHC Plan. He attends School B. An annual review was held in January 2025 at School B. At this meeting, Mrs X explained why she believed Y needed more support. She wanted the Council to amend Y’s EHC Plan to reflect this.
24. Mrs X complained to the Council in March 2025, because she had not yet been notified whether the Council intended to amend Y’s EHC Plan, despite making enquiries. In response, the Council accepted it had not complied with the legal timeframe of four weeks, but committed to send an amended EHC Plan by 11 April 2025.
25. Whilst an amended EHC Plan was sent by this deadline, Mrs X was disappointed that it was incomplete because it failed to include information from an independent social work report that she had privately funded. The relevant section was left blank. This omission formed the basis of a further complaint and was considered by the Council under stage two of its complaints procedure. In summary, the Council said:

• it was satisfied Y’s needs were met at School B, and he had not been disadvantaged by any delay in the EHC Plan process;
• the delay in finalising the EHC Plan was caused by Mrs X wanting the independent social work report to be included. The Council was also awaiting a report from its own social work department; and
• staff illness also contributed to the delay.

26. The Council issued the final EHC Plan in mid July 2025.

Analysis

27. The Council has already accepted it took too long to tell Mrs X it intended to amend Y’s EHC Plan. There was further delay in issuing the final EHC Plan. The law says a final amended EHC Plan should be issued within 12 weeks from the annual review. In this case it took approximately six months. We expect Council’s to comply with statutory timescales. This delay is fault.
28. I am satisfied this delay caused Mrs X significant distress, uncertainty and frustration. This is injustice that requires a remedy.
29. I am unable to investigate or make a finding in whether this delay had a negative impact on Y’s SEN provision as claimed by Mrs X. This is because this matter is closely related to the content of the EHC Plan, that is appealable to the SEN Tribunal.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. The Council has agreed to take the following action within four weeks from the date of my final decision.
1. Apologise in writing to Mrs X.
2. Pay Mrs X £300 as a symbolic payment to acknowledge her distress and frustration caused by the delay in the EHC Plan process.
31. In response to complaint, the Council has provided Mrs X with an explanation for the delay and taken action to address staffing issues in the SEN team, in the event of staff illness. For this reason, I do not consider it necessary to make any service improvement recommendations.
32. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to action my recommendations to remedy the personal injustice to Mrs X. On this basis, I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman