Summary: The Council was at fault for not issuing the final amended EHC Plan for Mrs X’s child, Y within statutory timescales following an annual review. The Council was also at fault for issuing delayed responses to Mrs X’s complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to remedy the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused to Mrs X.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to issue Y’s final amended EHC Plan within statutory timescales following the annual review. She also complained the Council delayed responding to her complaint about this.
2. Mrs X said this caused her distress, frustration and uncertainty.

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. 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)
5. 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

6. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. 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

Relevant law and guidance

Annual reviews

8. 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. 
9. 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. 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) 
10. 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. Case law also found councils must issue the final amended EHC Plan within a further eight weeks.
11. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs.

The Council’s complaints policy

12. The Council’s complaints policy says it will acknowledge a complaint within five working days.
13. The Council’s complaints policy says it will provide a stage one complaint response within 10 working days of acknowledging the complaint. An extension of a further 10 working days can be applied increasing the total response time for a stage one complaint to 20 working days.
14. The Council’s complaints policy says it will provide a stage two complaint response within 20 working days of acknowledging the complaint.

What happened

15. Mrs X has a child Y who special education needs and an EHC Plan in place. The annual review meeting was held at the end of February 2025. The Council decided to amend Y’s EHC Plan so it should have sent Mrs X the amendment notice by the end of March and the final amended EHC Plan by the end of May at the latest.
16. In April, Mrs X made a stage one complaint that she had not received written notice of the Council’s decision to maintain, amend, or cease an EHC plan within four weeks of an Annual Review. The Council emailed Mrs X to acknowledge the complaint and to notify her it was currently responding to SEND complaints within 20 working days rather than 10 working days.
17. The Council issued a stage one complaint response at the end of May apologising for the delay in sending written notice of the Council’s decision and also for the delay in responding to her complaint. It said it had now sent Mrs X the proposed amended EHC Plan.
18. Mrs X remained dissatisfied with the matter and requested the Council consider her complaint at stage two in June.
19. The Council issued a stage two response at the end of July saying it had taken the following action to prevent similar future fault:
• Ongoing recruitment to the SEND team to increase staff; and
• Staff training on the annual review process including statutory timescales.
20. Mrs X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s handling of the matter and complained to us.
21. In August 2025, the Council issued Y’s final amended EHC Plan. Mrs X did not appeal the Plan.

My findings

Annual reviews

22. The Council held Y’s annual review meeting at the end of February 2025 and decided to amend Y’s EHC Plan. This meant the Council should have sent Mrs X the amendment notice and draft Plan by end of March 2025. The Council delayed doing this until May which was fault. The Council should have issued the amended final EHC Plan by the end of May but it did not do this until the start of August. This was a delay of 11 weeks and fault which caused Mrs X distress, frustration and uncertainty.
23. The Council has recruited more staff and provided annual review training to prevent similar fault in the future. Therefore, a further service improvement is not required.

Delayed complaint responses

24. Mrs X made a stage one complaint in mid-April and should have received a response within 20 working days as the Council had applied an additional 10 day extension. The Council did not issue a stage one response until the end of May. This was a delay of one week and fault.
25. Mrs X escalated her complaint to stage two in mid-June and should have received a response within 20 working days. The Council did not issue a stage two response until end of July. This was a delay of approximately two weeks and fault. This caused Mrs X distress, frustration and uncertainty.

Back to top

Action

26. Within one month of the final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Mrs X for the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by the delays with issuing the final amended EHC Plan and the complaint responses. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended.
2. Pay Mrs X £200 for the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by the delays with issuing the final amended EHC Plan and the complaint responses.
3. Remind complaints officers by way of staff training or a briefing to issue complaint responses within the timescales set out in the corporate complaints policy.
27. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

28. I find fault causing injustice and have made recommendations for the Council to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman