Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Miss X’s child’s education and special educational needs. Part of the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate it now, part of it concerns matters about which the complainant which had the right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability), and investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to lead to a different outcome in relation the rest of the complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council has not acted in line with its statutory rights and responsibilities when considering the educational and special educational needs of her son, Y. This has had a negative impact on Y’s education, mental health and wellbeing. Miss X says Y has not had access to appropriate education for two years.

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. 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)
4. 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.
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’, 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 no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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. Miss X complains that the Council has failed to ensure her son Y has received appropriate educational and special educational provision. Specifically, she complains that the Council failed to amend his Education Health and Care (EHC) plan in 2023, 2024 and 2025. She further complains that the Council has unreasonably declined to name an appropriate school placement.
10. Miss X says that Y’s EHC plan was reviewed in July 2023, but none of the recommended amendments were made. This aspect of the complaint is late. Late complaints are where a complainant takes more than 12 moths to complain to us. This restriction applies to this aspect of the complaint and there are no good reasons for us to investigate it now.
11. Miss X complains about the delay in making a decision about Y’s EHC plan following the annual review in 2024. The evidence demonstrates that the process was delayed, and the council has apologised for this. We cannot however comment on the decision to make no changes to the EHC plan. This is a decision about which Miss X could have used her right to appeal to the Tribunal, and it would have been reasonable for her to do so.
12. Miss X also says that the EHC plan put in place for Y in 2025 failed to reflect Y’s current needs and diagnoses. Miss X complains that the Council failed to act in line with the agreement following mediation and did not name an appropriate school. Again, we will not investigate this aspect of the complaint as it would have been reasonable for Miss X to appeal to the Tribunal.
13. Miss X complains that her son, Y, has been out of school due to not having access to safe education The Council accepts that fault on its part did lead to a delay in identifying suitable education. It has agreed to provide home tuition whilst an alternative school is found. In response to the fault on its part, the Council has offered Miss X a payment of £1000. It is unlikely that investigation by the Ombudsman would lead to a significantly different outcome and our intervention is not therefore warranted.

Back to top

Final decision

We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because our intervention is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman