Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not review her child’s Education Health and Care Plan within statutory timescales and did not provide suitable education when they were out of school. Mrs X says this impacted her child’s education and emotional wellbeing. We find fault which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X to remedy the injustice.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of her child, Y’s, education. Specifically, she complains the Council:

1. Did not review their Education Health and Care Plan in line with statutory timescales;
2. Did not provide suitable education; and
3. Communicated poorly.

2. Mrs X says this impacted Y’s education and emotional wellbeing. She says it also caused her avoidable distress and financial strain.

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. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
6. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. Mrs X complains about a delay which began in 2023. She brought her complaint to us in September 2025. As I have said above, we cannot investigate late complaints unless there is good reason. I consider it was reasonable for Mrs X to make her complaint sooner. For this reason, I have investigated all matters from September 2024, which is twelve months before Mrs X made her complaint to us.
8. I have investigated parts a, b and c of the complaint from September 2024.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
11. 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 found

What should have happened

Education Health and Care Plan statutory timescale (part a of the complaint)

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. 
13. 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) 

Suitable education (part b of the complaint)

14. The council has a duty to make sure the child or young person receives the special educational provision set out in section F of an EHC Plan (Section 42 Children and Families Act). The Courts have said the duty to arrange this provision is owed personally to the child and is non-delegable. This means if the council asks another organisation to make the provision and that organisation fails to do so, the council remains liable (R v London Borough of Harrow ex parte M [1997] ELR 62), (R v North Tyneside Borough Council [2010] EWCA Civ 135)  
15. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that councils must arrange suitable alternative educational provision when it finds that a child is unable to attend school because of a permanent exclusion, an illness, or for any other reason which make the school inaccessible to the child. The alternative educational provision must be suitable to the child’s age, ability and aptitude, and any special educational needs they have.

What happened

16. Y has an EHC Plan.
17. Prior to September 2024, the Plan named a specialist school placement. The provision detailed included some individual lessons and one day per week at a forest school. Y was also accessing about four hours of mentoring per week.
18. In September 2024, Y was permanently excluded. The Council was aware Y was not at school and provided eight hours of mentoring and three hours of English and maths tuition to Y per week.
19. In November, the Council reviewed Y’s EHC Plan. It told Mrs X it planned to make changes to the Plan. It consulted with other placements.
20. The consultation for another placement was not successful. Mrs X contacted the Council several times and requested an update.
21. In April 2025, the Council told Mrs X it would process referrals for more tuition once the Council lifted a temporary pause on funding alternative education packages.
22. In July, Mrs X made her complaint to the Council.
23. The Council apologised to Mrs X for the lack of education provision provided and accepted the alternative provision it had provided did not meet the educational provision and outcomes set for Y. It apologised it had not yet arranged any educational provision for Y from September 2025. It also apologised for its poor communication.
24. In October, the Council issued the finalised EHC Plan. It detailed Y would be educated with an Education Other Than At School (EOTAS) package which included an additional eight hours of tuition.
25. In late October, Y had access to the educational provision set out in their EOTAS package.

Analysis

Education Health and Care Plan statutory timescale (part a of the complaint)

26. We expect councils to follow the statutory timescales set out in the law and the Code. We are likely to find fault where there are significant breaches of those timescales. The Council must complete an EHC Plan review within 12 months of the first EHC Plan and within 12 months of any later reviews. The Council should have completed the review before the start of our investigation in September 2024. It did not complete the review until October 2025. This delay was over a year longer than the timescale allows. This is fault which caused Mrs X and B injustice by avoidable and unnecessary uncertainty.
27. The Council has recently told the Ombudsman about the actions it is taking to ensure it completes EHC Plan reviews within statutory timescales in relation to other cases. Therefore, I am not making service improvement recommendations in this case.

Suitable education (part b of the complaint)

28. The Council accepts it did not provide sufficient education for Y for the entirety of the school year from September 2024. It did not provide suitable provision to Y until late October 2025. The failure to provide suitable alternative education and special educational provision is fault.
29. Y did have access to some provision during this time. Y had access to eight hours of mentoring and three hours of English and maths tuition per week which met some of their special educational needs. Mrs X also purchased some resources to provide some additional informal English and maths provision during this time. However, this does not equate to the education and special educational provision Y should have accessed during the school year. I consider the Council’s lack of provision caused Y a loss of educational provision which is injustice. I consider the lack of provision also caused Mrs X significant avoidable uncertainty and distress.
30. The Council apologised to Mrs X for its failure to provide Y with sufficient education for the school year from September 2024. I do not consider the apology to be a sufficient remedy to the injustice caused to Y and Mrs X.

Communication (part c of the complaint)

31. The Council apologised to Mrs X for the distress caused by its poor communication. It acknowledged its communication had been inconsistent and it had not provided her with clear updates. It told Mrs X it was taking service improvement action to improve its communication with families particularly around the EOTAS process and providing updates when consulting schools. I am satisfied the Council’s apology and service improvement action sufficiently remedies the injustice caused by its poor communication.

Back to top

Action

32. Within four weeks of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. provide a written apology for the unnecessary and avoidable uncertainty caused by its delay of over one year to issue Y’s reviewed EHC Plan.
2. make a payment of £4200 to remedy three and a half terms of missed alternative education and special educational provision from September 2024 until late October 2025. In arriving at this figure I considered Y did have access to mentoring and some educational provision during this time, although this did not equate to a full year or meet the provision detailed in Y’s EHC Plan. I also considered Y’s age and special educational needs. I consider the missed year was not a particularly significant school year. I consider this amount is in line with our published guidance and is proportionate to the injustice caused.
3. make a payment of £500 to remedy the avoidable uncertainty caused to Mrs X by its delay of over a year to issue Y’s final reviewed EHC Plan.
33. 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 in my findings.
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. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman