Summary: We upheld part of Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to secure the content of her child’s Education, Health and Care Plan because the Council upheld the complaint and offered Mrs X £2,225 in line with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies. We cannot investigate part of the complaint because Mrs X appealed to a tribunal. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a delay in actioning a tribunal order because the injustice is not significant enough. We will not investigate the remainder of Mrs X’s complaint because it is late.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to:
1. secure the content of her child, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan between March 2023 and May 2025; and
2. update Y’s EHC Plan in line with statutory timescales following a SEND Tribunal order in May 2025.
2. Mrs X said the matter caused her uncertainty and distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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 Tribunal in this decision statement.
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. 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)
7. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
8. 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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
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

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
11. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Matters before April 2024

12. Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman in June 2025. Some of the matters Mrs X complained about happened more than 12 months before this date and are therefore late. The law says the Ombudsman cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons.
13. I have seen no good reasons why Mrs X could not have complained about some matters sooner. Mrs X was aware Y was out of education from 2023. Mrs X could have complained at the time. Consequently, we will not investigate matters before April 2024.
14. I decided to investigate matters from April 2024. The Council agreed to provide tuition for Y from this date but did not do so. Although this is slightly more than 12 months from Mrs X’s complaint to the Ombudsman the injustice caused by the fault continued into the period we can consider. Therefore, I exercised discretion to assess the complaint from April 2024.

Securing Y’s EHC Plan between April 2024 and January 2025

15. In its complaint responses the Council upheld Mrs X’s complaint about failing to secure the content of Y’s EHC Plan between April 2024 and January 2025.
16. The Council apologised for the frustration and uncertainty it caused and offered Mrs X a symbolic payment of £2,225 to acknowledge Y’s missed EHC provision over two academic terms.
17. The Council’s apology and the symbolic payment are in line with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies. Consequently, although we uphold this complaint, we will not investigate because the Council has already remedied the injustice caused.

Securing Y’s EHC Plan January 2025 to May 2025

18. The Council issued a new EHC Plan for Y in January 2025. Mrs X disagreed with the named school in section I and appealed this to the SEND Tribunal. Mrs X did not send Y to the school named in section I during this time.
19. The courts have confirmed that we cannot investigate any matter which is part of, or connected to, a tribunal appeal., The reason Y did not receive the content of their EHC Plan is too closely related to the matter Mrs X appealed to the SEND Tribunal about. Therefore, we cannot investigate how the Council secured Y’s EHC Plan during this period.

Tribunal order May 2025

20. The SEND Tribunal ordered the Council to change the named school in Section I of Y’s EHC Plan. To comply with the SEND regulations the Council should have issued a new final EHC Plan within two weeks of the SEND Tribunal’s order. It did not do so until approximately four weeks after the order.
21. Any injustice caused by a two-week delay is not significant enough to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

22. We upheld part of Mrs X’s complaint because the Council upheld the complaint and offered a suitable remedy. We cannot investigate part of the complaint because Mrs X appealed to a tribunal. We will not investigate another part of the complaint because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement. We will not investigate the remainder because it is late.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman