Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed the EHC needs assessment for her son, Y. Mrs X said this distressed her and Y missed education. There was fault in the way the Council did not issue the EHC plan within statutory timescales. This frustrated and distressed Mrs X. The Council agreed to make a financial payment.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council delayed the EHC needs assessment for her son, Y. Mrs X said this distressed her and Y missed education.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a Council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
4. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read Mrs X’s complaint and spoke to her about it on the phone.
6. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

8. 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. 
9. Statutory guidance ‘Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years’ (‘the Code’) sets out the process for carrying out EHC assessments and producing EHC Plans. The guidance is based on the Children and Families Act 2014 and the SEN Regulations 2014. It says the following: 

• Where the council receives a request for an EHC needs assessment it must decide whether to agree to the assessment and send its decision to the parent of the child or the young person within six weeks. 
• The process of assessing needs and developing EHC Plans “must be carried out in a timely manner”. Steps must be completed as soon as practicable. 
• If the council goes on to carry out an assessment, it must decide whether to issue an EHC Plan or refuse to issue a Plan within 16 weeks.
• If the council goes on to issue an EHC Plan, the whole process from the point when an assessment is requested until the final EHC Plan is issued must take no more than 20 weeks (unless certain specific circumstances apply). 

What happened

10. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
11. Mrs X asked the Council to complete an EHC needs assessment in April 2024.
12. The Council agreed to complete an assessment and asked professionals for their reports in May 2024.
13. The Council received the professionals reports by August 2024.
14. The Council issued Y’s EHC Plan in February 2025.
15. Mrs X complained to the Council in June 2025. She complained the Council delayed completing the needs assessment and this delayed Y starting at a specialist nursery.
16. The Council issued its complaint response in July 2025. The Council accepted it did not issue Y’s EHC Plan within the statutory timescale and apologised. The Council confirmed it did not have a formal duty to provide education as Y was under the statutory education age. The Council accepted its delays delayed Y starting at a specialist nursery, but he could have attended a different nursery who would have made reasonable adjustments to meet his needs. The Council upheld the complaint. It offered £600 for the delayed EHC needs assessment and a further £200 for Mrs X’s distress.
17. Mrs X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage two the following week. She said she would like the Council to improve its service.
18. The Council issued its stage two response in August 2025. The Council accepted it did not issue Y’s EHC Plan within the statutory timescale and apologised. The Council detailed the pressure on its service to explain the delays but accepted this was not an excuse.
19. Mrs X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Mrs X would like the Council to improve its service.
20. In response to my enquiries the Council accepted it did not complete the EHC needs assessment within the statutory timescale.

My findings

21. Mrs X asked the Council to complete the EHC needs assessment for Y in April 2024. The Council should have issued its decision by the end of May 2024. The Council issued its decision and asked professionals for their reports at the start of May 2024. The Council was not at fault.
22. The Council should have issued the final EHC Plan by September 2024. The Council issued the final EHC Plan in February 2025, a 25-week delay, five months.
23. The Ombudsman takes the view that councils must abide by the statutory and legislative requirements under the SEN legislation and guidance. The Council’s failure to meet the required timeframes here amounts to fault. 
24. This fault delayed Y starting at a specialist nursery, but not other nurseries. As Y is below statutory school age, the Council has not failed in its duty to ensure Y received education. The delay also frustrated Mrs X. The Council apologised and offered Mrs X £600 for the delays in the needs assessment and £200 for the distress of having to make a complaint. This offer is in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies and is suitable remedy for the injustice the Council fault caused. Mrs X confirmed she did not previously accept this offer.

Back to top

Action

25. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Mrs X by the fault I have identified, the Council agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of my final decision:
• Pay Mrs X the £800 it offered to recognise the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by a five-month delay in issuing Y’s EHC Plan.
26. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

27. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Mrs X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman