Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care process regarding her child, Y, because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation. We will not investigate Miss X’s view that the Council failed to arrange alternative provision for Y because there is insufficient evidence of fault. We will not investigate the Council’s complaint handling because the tests in our assessment code are not met.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council:
1. failed to comply with statutory timescales relating to her child’s Education, Health and Care needs assessment;
2. failed to organise alternative education for her child; and
3. failed to respond to her complaint on time.
2. Miss X said the matter caused her distress. She said it caused Y uncertainty about their education placement.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Delay in EHC Process

6. Miss X asked the Council to conduct an EHC needs assessment of Y. The Council agreed, and decided it should make an EHC Plan for Y. It should have made the final EHC Plan within 20 weeks of the original application. Miss X said the EHC Plan should have been made by mid-August 2025.
7. The Council sent Y’s final EHC Plan to Miss X in mid-October 2025. There was a delay of just below nine weeks.
8. We will not investigate this complaint. Although the delay likely caused Miss X and Y frustration and uncertainty, the period of delay is not significant enough to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint.

Organising education for Y

9. Miss X complained the Council failed to organise alternative education for Y under section 19 of the Education Act 1996.
10. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 only applies to “school aged” children. The duty to provide section 19 provision ceases after the final Friday in the June of the academic year in which the child turns 16. Y turned 16 before the final EHC Plan was scheduled to be made.
11. Consequently, there is insufficient evidence of fault, and we will not investigate this complaint.

Complaint handling failure

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that the Council’s complaint response was late. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.
13. Because we are not investigating the substantive matters, we will not investigate the Council’s complaints handling.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate part of Miss X’s complaint because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation. We will not investigate part because there is insufficient evidence of fault. We will not investigate the remainder because the tests in our assessment code are not met.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman