Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of the Education and Health Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused by its delay and it is unlikely further investigation would achieve significantly more for Miss X.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council did not complete her child’s annual review of their Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan within the statutory timescales. She also says she requested a new Educational Psychologist assessment for her child, but the Council did not arrange one. She also complains about the content of the EHC Plan and the way the Council reached its decisions on what to include.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
8. 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

My assessment

Delay

9. Miss X says the Council did not complete her child’s annual review of their EHC plan within the statutory timescale. She also says she requested a new educational psychologist assessment at the annual review meeting, which the Council failed to arrange and that the Council’s communication was poor.
10. The law and Government guidance details the procedure for reviewing and amending EHC Plans. An EHC Plan review should take place at least once every twelve months. If the Council decides to amend the Plan it should tell the parent within four weeks of the annual review meeting and issue the amended final Plan within 12 weeks.
11. Having reviewed the information available I have reached the view that it is likely we would find the Council at fault if we investigated because:

• The Council failed to inform Miss X it planned to amend the EHC within four weeks as specified in the SEN Code of Practice. The annual review meeting took place on 11 December 2024, so the Council should have completed the review and issued the amended final EHC Plan within 12 weeks of this date, by 5 March 2025. The Council did not however issue the amended final EHC Plan until 25 July 2025. The delay amounts to more than 20 weeks or five months.
• The delay has frustrated the mediation process and Miss X’s right of appeal. It has also caused her uncertainty and frustration.

12. The Council has now agreed to an educational psychologist assessment for Miss X’s child but her personal injustice remains unremedied. We have therefore invited the Council to provide a remedy to Miss X for this issue and the Council, to its credit, has agreed to our proposal.

Contents of the EHC Plan

13. Miss X is unhappy with the contents of the amended final EHC Plan as she says the provision specified in Section F is not specific and relies on outdated reports and vague wording. She says this is the result of the Council’s failure to obtain expert advise and to gather appropriate information to inform its decision on her child’s special educational needs and the provision required to assist them with these.
14. But this complaint concerns the contents of the EHC Plan and they carried a right of appeal to the Tribunal which it would have been reasonable for Miss X to use. We will not therefore investigate this issue for the reasons set out at Paragraphs 4 and 5.

Back to top

Agreed action

15. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and pay her £500 for the impact of the delay. It will do this within one month of our final decision.

Back to top

Final Decision

16. We have upheld this complaint because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Miss X. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaints about the contents of the amended final EHC Plan as it would have been reasonable for Miss X to appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman