Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed issuing her child’s final amended EHC Plan and in handling her complaints. We find the Council at fault for a four-month delay in issuing the final Plan and for significant delays and poor quality in its complaint handling. These faults caused Mrs X distress, uncertainty, time and trouble, and frustrated her right of appeal. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council failed to issue her child, Y’s final amended Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan within the statutory timescales. She also complains about delays in the Council’s handling of her complaint.
2. Mrs X says these delays caused her stress, anxiety and uncertainty, and led to a loss of education for Y.

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

What I have and have not investigated

6. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the SEND Tribunal in this decision.  
7. In this case, Mrs X appealed to the SEND Tribunal regarding the final amended EHC Plan issued in August. Her appeal concerns the content of the Plan, specifically that it does not clearly set out how the Council will secure the special educational provision in Section F, as not all provision is reflected within the personal budget in Section J.
8. The law prevents us from investigating matters that have been, or could be, considered by the Tribunal. However, we may investigate issues which fall outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. This includes administrative matters such as delays prior to the point when appeal rights arise.
9. Accordingly, I have investigated Mrs X’s complaint about delays in the EHC Plan review and amendment process, and the Council’s handling of her complaints.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

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. 

Content of an EHC Plan

13. The EHC Plan is set out in sections which include: 

• Section F: The special educational provision needed by the child or the young person. 
• Section J: Details of any personal budget required to fund the provision in the EHC Plan.

Personal Budgets

14. A Personal Budget is the amount of money the council has identified it needs to pay to secure the provision in a child or young person’s EHC Plan. One way that councils can deliver a Personal Budget is through direct payments. These are cash payments made to the child’s parent or the young person so they can commission the provision in the EHC Plan themselves.

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. 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.

Appeal rights

17. 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

18. In March 2024, the Council issued Y’s EHC Plan. This included a personal budget totalling £16,410 to deliver specified provision.
19. An annual review of the Plan took place in January 2025. Following this, the Council issued a draft amended EHC Plan.
20. The Council issued two further draft Plans in March 2025. The later draft showed a reduced personal budget of £12,900.
21. Later that month, Mrs X complained that she had received £12,750 in direct payments in February, which was less than the amount set out in the Plan. She also said the total personal budget did not cover all the provision specified in Section F. She asked the Council to pay the outstanding amount and increase the personal budget to reflect all required provision.
22. In May, Mrs X made a further complaint about the Council’s failure to issue a final amended EHC Plan following the March draft.
23. The Council issued the final amended EHC Plan in August 2025. This confirmed a revised personal budget of £12,900 for the period February 2025 to January 2026. The Council subsequently paid her £150 to make up the shortfall between the amount of direct payments she had received and the amount set out in the Plan.
24. The Council then issued its complaint response. It explained it had escalated the complaint directly to stage two of its procedure in June. It said the revised personal budget had been communicated previously and that payments had continued without interruption. The Council acknowledged delays in issuing the final Plan and responding to the complaint and offered £150 as a symbolic remedy.
25. Mrs X subsequently appealed the August 2025 EHC Plan to the SEND Tribunal, maintaining that it does not clearly explain how the provision in Section F will be secured.
26. In response to my enquiries, the Council said the delay in issuing the final amended Plan was due to Mrs X disputing the level of the personal budget.
27. The Council also said delays in complaint handling were due to capacity issues. It explained it had since reviewed its complaints process, improved oversight and monitoring, and introduced clearer escalation procedures to improve compliance with complaint handling standards.

My findings

Delay issuing the final amended plan

28. Y’s annual review took place in January 2025. The law requires the Council to issue a final amended EHC Plan within 12 weeks of the review meeting. This means the Plan should have been issued by April 2025.
29. The Council did not issue the final amended Plan until August 2025, a delay of approximately four months. This was fault.
30. The Council says the delay arose because Mrs X disputed the personal budget. However, the evidence shows the content of the Plan did not materially change between the March draft and the final version issued in August. The Council should not delay issuing a final Plan while disagreements remain; instead, it should issue the Plan to allow the parent to exercise their right of appeal.
31. The delay therefore frustrated Mrs X’s right of appeal and caused her uncertainty about Y’s provision.
32. I have considered the Council’s offer of £150 in line with our guidance on remedies, I do not consider this sufficient to remedy the injustice caused.

Complaint handling

33. Mrs X made two complaints to the Council. The Council decided to combine these and respond at stage two of its procedure.
34. The responses were issued 74 working days and 31 working days late respectively. These delays amount to fault.
35. The delays caused Mrs X avoidable uncertainty, distress, and time and trouble in pursuing her complaint.
36. In addition, the complaint response did not adequately address the issues raised. It failed to properly explain the reduction in the personal budget or respond fully to Mrs X’s concerns. This was poor complaint handling and amounts to further fault, which caused additional distress.

Back to top

Action

37. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults, within four weeks of the date of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• apologise to Mrs X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology; and
• pay Mrs X a total of £350, comprising of:
1. £200 to recognise the time and trouble caused by poor complaint handling; and
2. £150 (in addition to the £150 already offered) to recognise the distress, uncertainty, and frustration of appeal rights caused by the delay issuing the final EHC Plan.
38. I have not recommended any action for the Council to take to improve its SEND or complaints services. This is because the Council has already shared the improvements it has made within its complaint handling. The Council has also accepted and implemented service improvements previously recommended by the Ombudsman, including ensuring amended plans are sent within the statutory timescales. These recommendations were made and implemented after the events in this case.
39. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

40. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman