Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to meet the statutory timescales to issue her son’s Education Health and Care Plan following annual reviews in January and December 2025. Neither plan has been issued causing distress and frustrating Mrs X’s appeal rights. A symbolic payment and immediate action to issue the EHC Plan is agreed.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to meet the statutory timescales to issue her son’s EHC Plan following annual reviews in January 2025 and December 2025.
2. She says this has caused stress and uncertainty especially in respect of occupational therapy sessions.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

EHC Plan 

7. 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

8. 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) 
9. If the council decides not to amend an EHC Plan or decides to cease to maintain it, it must inform the child’s parents or the young person of their right to appeal the decision to the tribunal.
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. If the child’s parents or the young person disagrees with the decision to cease the EHC Plan, the council must continue to maintain the EHC Plan until the time has passed for bringing an appeal, or when an appeal has been registered, until it is concluded.

Key facts

12. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.

13. Mrs X’s son has an EHC Plan. The annual review process began in December 2024 with a meeting at his school. The documents were then sent to the Council for it to take action in January 2025.
14. In June 2025, Mrs X made a formal complaint about the Council’s failure to progress the EHC Plan and the failure to issue it within the statutory timescale. A week after the complaint was made, the Council wrote to Mrs X stating it intended to amend the EHC Plan and provided details of the proposed changes. It also upheld Mrs X’s complaint and said action would be taken within a month including considering funding for occupational therapy.
15. When no action was taken within the month as promised, Mrs X asked the Council to progress her complaint to stage two of its complaint process. It declined to do this saying Mrs X had not provided any new information. On 22 August a panel agreed to provide OT for the first two terms of the academic year starting September 2025. It telephoned Mrs X the same day to notify her of this decision. The panel decision stated that there was an expectation the OT would end after two terms and the team around Mrs X’s son would continue to deliver this in the school.
16. In November the school wrote to the Council with a request from the occupational therapist working with Mrs X’s son. It asked if the remaining OT sessions could be spread across the rest of the whole school year rather than stopping abruptly at the end of the spring term. The Council agreed to the request saying it was reasonable and in the child’s best interests.
17. The school held the next annual review meeting in December 2025 and sent the paperwork to the Council on 9 December. This included a recommendation from the OT that fortnightly sessions should continue for the next two years. The documents provided to the Council state the date of the current EHC Plan as 25 January 2024.

Analysis

18. Councils have a duty to review EHC Plans at least annually. The annual review process includes a review meeting and the subsequent decision which can be appealed. The annual review meeting should be timed so the whole process is completed within 12 months of the previous review.
19. After the review meeting, councils must make a decision whether to maintain, amend or cease the plan. All three decisions carry a right of appeal but only once the final EHC Plan is issued.
20. Where the council decides to amend the EHC Plan it must notify the parent of this decision, along with the proposed changes within four weeks of the annual review meeting. The council must then issue the final amended plan within eight weeks of the amendment notice. This means the whole process should be completed within 12 weeks of the annual review meeting.
21. In this case, the Council failed to notify Mrs X within four weeks of the annual review meeting in January 2025 that it intended to amend the EHC Plan. It was not until June 2025, some five months after the review meeting that Mrs X had any contact from the Council. After upholding Mrs X’s complaint, the Council indicated it would contact her again within four weeks but failed to do this. In a telephone call Mrs X was notified of a decision to fund occupational therapy however there is no evidence to show a final EHC Plan was ever issued.
22. I asked the Council to provide a chronology of its actions following the annual review meeting in January 2025 and to provide a copy of the final EHC Plan and covering letter. No documents have been provided and the written chronology only mentions the Council sending an amended draft EHC Plan. I also note that the documents for the next annual review meeting in January 2026 state the current EHC Plan was dated 2024 indicating a final EHC Plan was never issued. This is fault.
23. Mrs X does not have a document setting out the special education provision her son is legally entitled to receive. As no final EHC Plan has been issued, Mrs X’s right of appeal has been frustrated and she had no way to challenge if she disagreed with it.
24. As stated above, reviews of EHC Plans have to take place at least annually. Therefore the school held another review meeting in December 2025. Again I asked the Council to provide a chronology of its actions following the review meeting and copies of significant documents. It has failed to provide anything leading me to take the view that no action was taken and again it failed to meet the statutory 12 week timescale. This is fault. Which again frustrated Mrs X’s right of appeal.
25. Mrs X’s concerns regarding the special education provision relates to the occupational therapy. It was previously funded by adoption grants but she wanted it to be included in the EHC Plan when this funding ended. While the Council did agree at panel to fund OT for two terms from September 2025, it indicated this would end after this time. The Council agreed in November to spread out the remaining OT sessions over the remaining school year. There is nothing to suggest the agreed provision has not been provided.
26. However, the annual review in December 2025 recommended continuing OT for a further two years. As no action has been taken to conclude this annual review, Mrs X has no idea if the OT will continue after the end of this academic year. She has no way of challenging this because her appeal rights have not yet engaged due to the failure to issue the final EHC Plan. This fault has caused significant stress and uncertainty.
27. I also note that Mrs X used the complaint process to try to resolve the issues. Her stage one complaint was upheld but did not result in completion of the first annual review process. She then tried to continue with the complaint due to the lack of action. However, the Council declined to consider her complaint further on the basis she failed to provide any further evidence of fault following its stage one consideration. This seems to me to be a perverse decision as the Council’s failure to take action meant there was no further evidence for Mrs X to submit. Mrs X then had no option but to progress the complaint to the Ombudsman putting her to avoidable time and trouble.
28. Based on the evidence I have seen, there is fault causing injustice in this case. I am therefore proposing a remedy in line with our published guidance. This states we will recommend a symbolic payment to recognise distress, anxiety and frustration. Our guidance states we will normally recommend a remedy payment for distress of up to £500 but can recommend higher payments where we consider it was especially severe and/or prolonged and/or taking account of the personal vulnerability of those affected. I am recommending a payment higher than £500 because I am satisfied the distress in this case has been prolonged as two annual reviews have taken place and still the Council has not issued a final EHC Plan. I also consider that as an adopted child, Mrs X’s son is more vulnerable.

Back to top

Agreed action

29. To remedy the injustice caused as a result of the fault identified above the Council will, within one month of my final decision, take the following action:
• Apologise to Mrs X for the fault identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended;
• Make Mrs X a symbolic payment of £1000 to recognise the prolonged distress caused as a result of the failure to issue two final EHC Plans and therefore frustrate her rights of appeal;
• Immediately notify Mrs X of its intention to either cease, amend or maintain the EHC Plan in respect of the annual review meeting held in December 2025 and then issue the final plan within a further eight weeks;
• Make Mrs X a payment of £200 to recognise her time and trouble in having to bring the case to the Ombudsman because it refused to progress the complaint to stage two of its complaint procedure even when it did not carry out the actions set out in the stage one response; and
30. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
31. Over the past two years we have issued several decisions finding fault with the Council’s consideration of its SEN duties. We have required the Council to take action to address the types of issues identified in this complaint. As appropriate recommendations have been made on other cases, I have decided not to make any service improvement recommendations in this case.

Back to top

Decision

32. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault for the reasons explained in this statement. The Council has agreed to implement the actions I have recommended. These appropriately remedy any injustice caused by fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman