Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not issue her child’s Education Health and Care Plan within statutory timescales. She also complained it did not provide her with her right to appeal. She said this caused her and her child unnecessary stress. We find no fault.

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 issue the reviewed Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan within statutory timescales;
2. Wrongly decided not to provide the provision she proposed; and
3. Did not properly issue her with her right to appeal to Tribunal.

2. Mrs X says this caused her and Y unnecessary stress during their exam period.

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 a complaint if someone has appealed 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)
7. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the Tribunal in this decision statement.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. Mrs X complains the Council declined the provision she proposed. She used her right to appeal the provision detailed in the EHC Plan to the Tribunal. As I have explained above, we cannot overlap with the role of a tribunal. For this reason, I have not investigated part b of the complaint.
9. I have investigated part a and part c of the complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. 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

What should have happened

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 council can do this.
13. The EHC Plan is set out in sections which include: 

• Section B: Special educational needs.  
• Section F: The special educational provision needed by the child or the young person. 
• Section I: The name and/or type of educational placement. 

14. For young people moving from secondary school to a post-16 institution or apprenticeship, the council must review and amend the EHC Plan – including specifying the post-16 provision and naming the institution – by 31 March in the calendar year of the transfer.  

Appeal right (part c of the complaint)

15. When it has issued an EHC Plan, the Council must inform the child’s parents or the young person of their right to appeal its contents to the Tribunal.

What happened

16. Y had an EHC Plan. Y was due to move to post-16 education in September 2025.
17. Mrs X used her right to appeal to Tribunal. She appealed sections B, F and I of the EHC Plan.
18. In March 2025, the Tribunal ordered the Council to issue an amended Plan with amendments to sections B, F and I.
19. On 31 March, the Council issued a final EHC Plan with the amendments ordered by the Tribunal. It said Y would be provided with an EOTAS package for post-16. The Plan said the Council would issue another Plan before 31 May 2025 which would provide the details of the EOTAS package.
20. In late May, the Council issued another final EHC Plan. It detailed up to 16 hours tuition per week for Y’s EOTAS package. It said this tuition would be either face to face or online. It gave Mrs X her right to appeal. Mrs X used her right to appeal.

Analysis

Statutory timescales (part a of the complaint)

21. 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. Statutory guidance says councils must review and amend the EHC Plan by 31 March the same year the young person is moving to post-16 education. The Council met this deadline. I find no fault.
22. Mrs X is unhappy the Plan issued in March 2025 did not contain the details of Y’s EOTAS package. The March 2025 Plan stated it would issue another finalised Plan with details of the EOTAS package within two months. It is not our role to ask whether an organisation could have done things better. The Council met its statutory deadline and the further two-month deadline it set itself. I find no fault.

Appeal rights (part c of the complaint)

23. I am satisfied the Council provided Mrs X with a written notification of her appeal right. Mrs X says she was unable to locate the document on the Council’s online ‘Hub’. This is not the fault of the Council. In any case, Mrs X used her right to appeal shortly after the Council issued its Plan. I find no fault with the Council.

Back to top

Decision

24. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman