Summary: The Council failed to provide agreed educational catch-up provision for Ms X’s child, Y and significantly delayed responding to her complaints. There was no fault in the Council’s handling of Ms X’s transport appeals. We have not investigated other parts of Ms X’s complaint as they are late. The Council has agreed to apologise for the uncertainty, distress and frustration caused and complete the process relating to Ms X’s complaint. It has also agreed to service improvements to prevent recurrence.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to:
• Deliver occupational therapy to her child Y between June 2023 and December 2023 and secure the content of Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan;
• Obtain relevant evidence for and complete an annual review of Y’s EHC Plan within statutory timescales; and
• Respond to her transport appeals and complaints.
2. She wants compensation for the distress, frustration, time and trouble caused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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)
6. 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

7. 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)
8. The annual review and assessments referred to in Ms X’s complaint were from 2023. This is caught be the restriction in paragraph seven of this decision.
9. Ms X complained to us in July 2025, therefore events before July 2024 would normally be captured by the restrictions in paragraph seven. However, I have used my discretion to look at events from March 2024 and the First-tier Special Educational Need and Disability (SEND) Tribunal decision for Y’s EHC Plan and the naming of Y’s school. This allows for investigation of the matters that fall within this time and are considered by the Council in its complaint responses. I have not investigated matters after the end of July 2025, when the Council provided its stage 2 response. These matters would be subject to a new complaint to the Council in the first instance.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Ms 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 Plan 

12. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This document sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them. The EHC Plan is set out in sections. We cannot direct changes to the sections about their needs, education, or the name of the educational placement. Only the Tribunal or the council can do this
13. The EHC Plan is set out in sections which include: 

• Section B: Special educational needs.  
• Section F: The special educational provision needed by the child or the young person. 
• Section I: The name and/or type of educational placement 

14. The council has a duty to make sure the child or young person receives the special educational provision set out in section F of an EHC Plan (Section 42 Children and Families Act). The Courts have said the duty to arrange this provision is owed personally to the child and is non-delegable. This means if the council asks another organisation to make the provision and that organisation fails to do so, the council remains liable (R v London Borough of Harrow ex parte M [1997] ELR 62), (R v North Tyneside Borough Council [2010] EWCA Civ 135)  

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. The council must complete the review within 12 months of the first EHC Plan and within 12 months of any later reviews. The annual review begins with consulting the child’s parents or the young person and the educational placement. A review meeting must then take place. Following the review meeting the council must issue a decision to either 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. If the council decides not to amend an EHC Plan or decides to cease to maintain it, it must inform the child’s parents or the young person of their right to appeal the decision to the tribunal.

SEN Transport - nearest suitable school

17. If only one school is named in a young person’s EHC plan, then that is the school the council has determined is the nearest suitable school for the child. It is therefore the nearest ‘qualifying school’ for the child to attend for school transport consideration. This is because the council has not made arrangements for the child to attend a closer school. (S and another v Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council [2012] EWCA Civ 346.) Where the child is attending the ‘nearest suitable school’, they will qualify for free transport, provided any other relevant conditions are met.

Transport appeals

18. Councils should have an appeals process in place for parents who wish to appeal about the eligibility of their child for travel support.
19. The statutory guidance recommends councils adopt the following appeals process:

• Stage 1: review by a senior officer. Within 20 working days of receiving a parent’s written request to appeal the decision, a senior officer reviews the original decision and sends the parent a detailed written notification of the outcome of the review setting out the nature of the decision, how the review was conducted, what was taken into account, the rationale for the decision reached, and how to escalate their case to stage 2; and
• Stage 2: Within 40 working days of receipt of the parent’s request, for an independent appeal panel to consider written and verbal representations, a detailed decision is sent setting out: the nature of the decision reached; how the review was conducted; what factors were considered; the rationale for the decision reached; and information about appealing to us. (Department of Education, Travel to school for children of compulsory school age statutory guidance 2023, Part 5)

The Council’s complaints policy

20. Complaints at stage one will be acknowledged in five working days, with a full response provided within ten working days of the acknowledgement.
21. Complaints at stage two will be acknowledged in five working days of the escalation request, with a full response provided within twenty working days of the acknowledgement. On rare occasions, if complex, a complaint investigation may take an additional 20 days if agreed upon with the complainant.

What happened

22. I have summarised below some key events leading to Ms X’s complaint. This is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
23. For the period of investigation Ms X’s child, Y, was in secondary education, has special educational needs (SEN) and an EHC Plan.
24. In March 2024, Ms X appealed sections B, F and I of Y’s EHC Plan to the SEND Tribunal. During the Tribunal, the Council agreed to name school A, an independent special school, in section I, with full funding.
25. Shortly after the Tribunal, Ms X applied for travel assistance for Y from their home address to school A.
26. In mid-April, the Council’s travel assistance panel declined Ms X’s request. It said school A was not the nearest school and was parental preference. A couple of days later the panel reconsidered its decision and awarded travel assistance, with a place on its external SEND transport to school A. Ms X appealed this decision due to Y’s needs.
27. At the end of April, after an investigation, the Council told Ms X,
• it would work with school A to provide occupational therapy (OT) catch up sessions for Y (this was following a Council investigation which accepted Y had missed out on OT provision during 2023);
• It had offered Y a shared taxi to school A, but this had not been agreed by Ms X; and
• It had agreed to fund school A from the beginning of March 2024. Ms X should provide evidence for tuition fees incurred from March 2024 for reimbursement.
28. At the beginning of May, the Council responded to a transport appeal made by Ms X in April. It said it was upholding an original decision to provide Y with a place in a shared taxi through its external SEND transport and, due to Y’s needs as outlined in the appeal evidence, they would be provided with a passenger assistant.
29. In June 2024, Ms X escalated her complaint, she said:
• The Council had not contacted school A about Y’s catch-up OT as it had advised it would; and
• Y’s transport offer was inadequate with ongoing failures by the Council, including an incorrectly dated appeal response that had given Ms X less than 24 hours to respond.
30. In mid-June 2024 the Council agreed to an independent review of the issues Ms X had raised in her complaint.
31. In mid-July Ms X made another transport assistance request. In its response, at the beginning of August, the Council said its offer remained that Y could have a seat on the shared SEND transport, starting in September 2024.
32. At the start of November 2024, the Council commissioned an external investigating officer to investigate Ms Y’s escalated complaint. Between December 2024 and January 2025, the investigating officer held meetings with Ms X and relevant correspondence was exchanged.
33. Ms X requested an update from the investigating officer at the beginning of May 2025, she did not receive a response.
34. At the end of May 2025, the Council issued an amended EHC plan for Y, naming school A. It also named school B for their post 16 education from September 2025. Ms X made a transport application request to the Council for travel assistance to school B from September 2025.
35. The Council told Ms X, its travel assistance panel in May, had decided a face-to-face travel needs assessment was needed for Y before provision of transport to school B.
36. In early June 2025, Ms X made a further application for travel assistance to school B. A travel assistance panel in mid-June said the assessment from May had not been completed as there had been no response from Ms X. It said the assessment was needed to evaluate eligibility, as Y was going to post 16 education from September.
37. In mid-June, Ms X again chased the external investigating officer for an update on her complaint. In their response the investigating officer said, they were unable to advance the investigation due to the level of information provided by the Council. They advised an internal investigation was completed instead.
38. The Council told Ms X it would decide how to progress her complaint. After not hearing by mid-July, Ms X asked the Council to make a decision so she could complain to the Ombudsman.
39. The Council provided it stage two response at the end of July 2025, it said:
• It apologised for the significant time it had taken to respond to her complaint;
• School A had been named at Tribunal. It said no other schools needed to be consulted and had agreed to fund tuition at school A from March 2024. Ms X had chosen to send Y to school A before it had agreed to fund the placement.
• It offered £900 for the delay in providing Ms X with her complaint responses and the time and trouble this had caused to her.
40. It made no comments relating to catch up OT being provided to Y at school A. It said it would reinvestigate the complaint to be certain of its position and asked she provide any outstanding fees for school A from March 2024.

During our investigation

41. The Council contacted Ms X and apologised for the lack of update to reinvestigated complaint matters. It offered Ms X a further £500 for the additional time and trouble caused to her.

Analysis

Loss of Provision

42. The delivery of Y’s OT provision in 2023 is caught by the restrictions in paragraph seven of this decision. However, in its stage one complaint response the Council offered catch up provision for OT in school A. There is no evidence to show this catch up happened which is fault. It has offered a payment of £900; this is in line with our guidance on remedies for loss of catch-up provision for one term.

Transport appeals

43. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether a person disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
44. The panel outcome of Ms X’s transport assistance request in May 2024, to school A, was reconsidered very quickly and awarded Y travel assistance. After Ms X appealed this outcome, the evidence shows the Council considered the additional evidence provided by Ms X and made changes to Y’s travel assistance to then include a passenger assistant, in line with its policy.
45. I have not seen any evidence to show it did not follow guidance, policies or consider any relevant evidence in Ms X’s subsequent transport assistance applications for Y in July 2024, August 2024 and May 2025. There is no fault in how the Council took the decisions and I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong.

Complaint handling

46. After Ms X escalated her complaint in mid-June 2024 and received clarification from Ms X about the matters she wanted addressing, the Council commissioned an external investigating officer in November 2024. Ms X did not receive an outcome from the external investigating officer until June 2025.
47. I have not seen any evidence to show how the Council monitored the external investigation to ensure a timely response to Ms X or ensured she was kept informed throughout the process. Rather, Ms X needed to chase for updates about the investigation herself. The use of an external investigating officer raised Ms X’s expectations that the matters in her complaint would reach resolution, they did not. The delay in the external investigation is over 10 months outside the Council’s own complaint policy. This was fault causing frustration, uncertainty, time and trouble to Ms X.
48. The offered payment by the Council, for the injustice caused by the complaint delay, now totals £1,400. This is more than the symbolic payment that would be recommended by the Ombudsman’s own guidance on remedies. It is for Ms X to decide whether to accept what has been offered by the Council.
49. The injustice caused to Ms X through the delays in complaint handling are significant and therefore it is appropriate to recommend service improvements to prevent recurrence of the same fault to Ms X or others in the future.

Back to top

Action

50. To remedy the injustice caused, within one month of the final decision the Council has agreed to take the following action:
1. apologise to Ms X for the injustice caused by the failings identified during this investigation. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how councils should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended.
51. Within three months of the final decision the Council has agreed to take the following action:
1. Review and update its complaints policy to ensure it reflects all stages of the complaints handling process, including the commissioning of external investigators. The review and updates should include, but is not limited to, the timescales for completion of each stage of a complaint and the Council’s monitoring and oversight procedures of complaints and external investigators.
52. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

53. I found fault causing injustice, the Council has agreed to recommendations to remedy the injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman