Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed issuing her son’s Education, Health and Care Plan following an annual review. Based on current evidence, the Council is at fault for delays in the annual review process. This caused Ms X distress and uncertainty, and a loss of provision to her son. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and make a symbolic payment.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council delayed issuing her son, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan following an annual review. She says as a result she has suffered significant distress and uncertainty. She also says her son has suffered loss of provision and his wellbeing has been impacted.

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 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)
3. 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.
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 Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. 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

Special educational needs

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. 

Reviewing EHC Plans

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. There is a right of appeal to the Tribunal against a council’s:

• description of a child or young person’s SEN, the special educational provision specified, the school or placement or that no school or other placement is specified in their EHC Plan;
• amendment to these elements of an EHC Plan.

What happened

12. Y has special educational needs and an EHC Plan. He started year 4 in September 2024.
13. The Council held an annual review of Y’s EHC Plan in March 2025. Following the review, it decided to amend Y’s EHC Plan.
14. At the end of May, Ms X submitted a stage one complaint to the Council as it had not yet issued Y’s amended draft EHC Plan. She said she wanted the provision set out in the EHC Plan in place as soon as possible to ensure Y’s needs were met.
15. At the beginning of July, Ms X contacted the Council to ask for its complaint response. She said she wanted it to issue the amended draft EHC Plan by the end of that day.
16. The Council responded on the same day and advised it would not be able to issue the EHC Plan that day as requested, but aimed to issue it, as well as its complaint response, by the end of that week.
17. Y’s school emailed the Council that same week and asked it to issue the amended draft EHC Plan by the end of that week to allow it to plan effectively for the new academic year.
18. The Council responded and said it was no longer possible to issue the EHC Plan by the end of the week, but said it aimed to do this by the end of the month.
19. The Council issued its complaint response in mid-July. It apologised to Ms X for its delayed response. It also apologised for its delay in issuing Y’s EHC Plan, and explained this was due to workload challenges. It said it would issue the EHC Plan by the end of the month and ensure this was finalised in time for Y to start the new academic year.
20. The Council did not issue the Plan at the end of July, so Ms X followed up with the Council at the beginning of August and twice in September to ask when it would be issued.
21. Ms X approached the Ombudsman in August.
22. The Council issued Y’s amended draft EHC Plan in October.
23. Ms X requested amendments to the draft, and the Council subsequently issued the second draft EHC Plan at the end of November.
24. The Council issued the final EHC Plan in mid-January 2026.

Analysis

Delay

25. As the annual review of Y’s EHC Plan took place on 25 March 2025, the statutory deadline for the Council to issue Y’s final Plan was 17 June 2025. The Council issued the EHC Plan on 16 January 2026, which means it was issued approximately 30 weeks late. This is a significant delay and is fault. This caused Ms X distress and uncertainty about what provision Y was going to receive, and when.
26. I have reviewed the new EHC Plan. Had the Council issued it within statutory timescales, Y would have received the increased level and frequency of provision it now specifies at an earlier stage. The updated Plan includes additional speech and language provision, enhanced 1:1 classroom support, and 1:1 support for core and foundation subjects. As a result of the delay, Y missed out on this special educational provision.
27. I have also reviewed the Council’s communications with Ms X. I can see that Ms X had to frequently contact the Council for updates regarding the EHC Plan. There is no evidence that suggests it proactively updated Ms X of its progress or explained the reason for the delays. This further added to Ms X’s distress and uncertainty.

Appeal rights

28. Had the Council finalised the EHC Plan in line with the statutory timeframe, it would have given Ms X appeal rights to the Tribunal sooner. In failing to finalise the Plan on time, the Council delayed Ms X’s appeal rights.
29. The Council did not issue a draft EHC Plan until October. Between October and January 2026, when the final Plan was issued, Ms X and the Council were discussing the content of the EHC Plan. However, the Council, by prolonging these discussions, further delayed the issuing of the final EHC Plan and in turn, further delayed Ms X’s appeal rights.
30. As Ms X has indicated she does want to use her appeal rights, I am of the view the delay caused Ms X unnecessary uncertainty and distress. I have made a recommendation to address this injustice below.

Remedy

31. The Council acknowledges it did not fully meet its statutory duties due to capacity constraints and high caseloads. It told the Ombudsman that it has since implemented measures to reduce delays, including additional recruitment, a strengthened annual review process, and improved monitoring of emerging SEN delays. I am satisfied that the Council has taken, and continues to take, reasonable steps to address these issues and I have not therefore made any further service improvement recommendations.
32. In response to my written enquiries, the Council offered to pay Ms X a remedy of £1250. Although I appreciate this offer, I have considered our Guidance on Remedies and have decided it does not sufficiently remedy the injustice to Ms X and Y caused by the Council’s actions. I have therefore recommended a more suitable remedy below.

Back to top

Agreed action

33. Within one month of the final decision the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Ms X for the uncertainty, distress, and loss of Y’s special educational provision caused by the identified fault.
2. Pay Ms X £2700 for Y’s loss of provision from June 2025 to January 2026. We recommend this be used for Y’s educational benefit.
34. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

35. I find fault causing injustice for which I have recommended a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman