Summary: We will not investigate Mrs A’s complaint about how the Council has dealt with her daughter’s Education Health and Care Plans. Part of the complaint is late. Part of the complaint is about issues that can be appealed to a Tribunal. There is not enough evidence of significant injustice to justify us investigating the other issues.

The complaint

1. Mrs A complained about how the Council handled her daughter’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans from 2021 to 2025. She complained that:
• there were delays in the Annual Review process in 2022 and 2023
• the Council failed to arrange an Occupational Therapy assessment between 2021 and 2023
• the Council named a mainstream school in her daughter’s EHC Plan despite this not being appropriate to her needs
• the Council failed to liaise adequately with Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) about her daughter’s needs arising from ADHD
• the Council failed to make sure some of the special educational provision in Section F of the EHC Plan was delivered
• support from the Council’s EHC caseworkers was inadequate, communication was poor and there were delays
2. Mrs A said she and her family had suffered years of uncertainty, stress and negative impact on their health and wellbeing because of the Council’s actions.

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, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:
• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than twelve months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended).
5. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability-SEND) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the SEND Tribunal in this decision statement.
6. 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. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mrs A, the Council and Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mrs A complained about delays in the Council completing the EHC Annual Review process in 2022 and 2023. She also complained the Council failed to arrange an Occupational Therapy assessment for her daughter between 2021 and 2023.
9. Mrs A raised these complaints with the Council in April 2023 and received a response in July 2023. She brought her complaint to the Ombudsman in August 2025, over two years later. There are no good reasons for us to exercise discretion to investigate these late complaints.
10. Mrs A made further complaints to the Council in March and August 2025. These complaints were brought to us within 12 months of the events and are therefore not late.
11. Some of Mrs A’s complaints to the Council during 2025 carry the right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal. These include her complaints about the mainstream school named in her daughter’s EHC Plan, and the contents of Section F and Section G of the EHC Plan. We cannot look at complaints that carry a right of appeal to a tribunal. We also cannot investigate any complaints that overlap with a SEND Tribunal appeal. When Mrs A brought her complaint to us, the Tribunal process was still ongoing. We cannot look at these parts of her complaint.
12. Mrs A also complains the Council did not ensure all her daughter’s special educational provision in the EHC Plan was delivered. She says the Council failed to work effectively with CAMHS to make sure her daughter’s needs arising from ADHD were addressed in the Plan, and that suitable support was provided. In July and August 2025 Mrs A told the Council she wanted immediate implementation of Section F provision, including ADHD-related support and adjustments, at her daughter’s new school. She said the Council was responsible for ensuring her daughter’s ADHD care and support was transferred into NHS care, because this related to her EHC Plan and provision.
13. The Council said it could not investigate matters relating to the new school, as Mrs A’s daughter had not started there yet and the events had not occurred. It said the issues relating to the content of Section F and G of the EHC Plan were for the Tribunal process. It said Mrs A’s complaints about CAMHS and her daughter’s ADHD diagnosis were matters for the CAMHS service to address. I have not seen any indications of fault in how the Council addressed these issues.
14. Mrs A has complained to Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust about issues relating to her daughter’s ADHD diagnosis and ongoing support. The Trust has investigated and responded to this complaint, and it is now with the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman for consideration.
15. Mrs A also complained to the Council that support from its EHC caseworkers was inadequate, communication was poor and there had been delays. The Council apologised for any delays Mrs A had experienced. It said it had increased its staffing levels, and the team was working on improving its communication with parents and carers. I have decided there is not enough evidence of significant injustice to justify us investigating these issues, and it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation or the actions it has taken to address this.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mrs A’s complaint. Part of the complaint is late, and part of the complaint is about issues that can be, and have been, appealed to the SEND Tribunal. There is not enough evidence of significant injustice to justify us investigating the other issues.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman