Summary: We have discontinued our investigation into Miss X’s complaint about the delay finalising her son’s Education, Health and Care plan. The Council has already apologised and offered a suitable remedy for the delay, so further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about the 2024 plan, as this is late. Miss X was given a right of appeal to the Tribunal regarding the latest plan, and it was reasonable to expect her to exercise that right.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to finalise her son’s (Y’s) Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan in 2024 and delayed finalising the current version. She says the draft sent in August 2025 was largely unchanged from the 2024 draft. Miss X would like the EHC plan to be finalised and for the Council to agree to an educational psychologist’s report.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone had a right of appeal to a tribunal about the same matter, or could have taken it to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would have been unreasonable to expect the person to use these rights. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(6)(a) and 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. 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.
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council.
7. Miss X and the Council now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. The Ombudsman cannot investigate complaints about matters which took place more than 12 months before someone complained to us, unless there are good reasons why it would have been unreasonable to expect them to complain to us sooner.
9. The Council reviewed Y’s EHC plan in January 2024. Miss X was aware of the issues relating to that plan at the time, but she did not contact the Ombudsman until September 2025.
10. This means Miss X’s complaint is late. In the absence of any good reason to disregard our statutory time limit, the law does not allow me to investigate it.
11. The Council carried out a further review of Y’s EHC plan in February 2025 and should have issued the final amended plan within 12 weeks.
12. Although a draft plan was issued in August 2025, the Council did not finalise the plan until January 2026, a delay of around eight months.
13. Once the final plan was issued, Miss X was given a right of appeal to the Tribunal. At that point, the contents of the plan became something for the Tribunal to decide.
14. It would have been reasonable to expect Miss X to use this appeal right, and, for this reason, I cannot look at her complaint about professional advice and reports relied on when finalising the plan. This is because the law prevents us from investigating matters which could have been resolved by the Tribunal. Our role cannot overlap that of the Tribunal.
15. The Council considered Miss X’s complaint through both stages of its complaints procedure. It apologised for the delay in exceeding the statutory timeframe for finalising the plan and for the distress caused. The Council offered Miss X a remedy payment of £900, which is in line with the Ombudsman’s published guidance on remedies.
16. The Council said it would introduce additional training and support arrangements to ensure continuity of service during staff absences and to reduce the risk of future delays. Taking this into account, together with the apology and financial remedy, I consider the injustice to Miss X has been remedied and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Decision

17. I have discontinued my investigation. The Council has taken action to remedy the injustice and no further action by the Ombudsman is needed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman