Summary: Miss Z complained on behalf of a child’s parents about the Council’s failure to complete their child’s (Y) Education, Health and Care Plan review within statutory timescales. We found there was a significant delay by the Council in issuing a final amended Plan for Y. This was fault. The Council has already made several service improvements and has agreed to make a symbolic payment to Y and his parents for the injustice caused by the faults.

The complaint

1. Miss Z complains on behalf of Mrs X. Miss Z says the Council delayed issuing an amended Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for Mrs X’s son, Y, following a review of the Plan in March 2024. Miss X says this meant the Council failed to secure the provision in Y’s EHC Plan and he has not received an education since March 2024.
2. Miss Z says the matter has significantly affected Y as he has lost out on suitable education and provision, and he was left without a school placement over a significant period. Miss Z says the matter has caused ongoing significant distress for the family.

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 recommend a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).
5. 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. Miss Z told the Ombudsman that Y was no longer in education. Y stopped attending school in September 2025. Miss Z complained to the Ombudsman at the same time and therefore the Council has not had the opportunity to respond to this part of the complaint. Mrs X will need to complain to the Council in the first instance.
7. For context, the report does reference some events that occurred in October 2025.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Miss Z and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Miss Z and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I consider any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Education, Health and Care Plans

10. 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.
11. The council has a duty to secure the specified special educational provision (Section F) in an EHC Plan for the child or young person (section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014). The Courts have said this duty to arrange provision is owed personally to the child and is non-delegable. This means if a council asks another organisation to make the provision and that organisation fails to do so, the Council remains responsible. (R v London Borough of Harrow ex parte M [1997] ELR 62), R v North Tyneside Borough Council [2010] EWCA Civ 135)
12. Councils must arrange for the EHC Plan to be reviewed at least once a year to make sure it is up to date. The review process includes a review meeting, and the subsequent decision, which have appeal rights.
13. Within four weeks of a review meeting, the council must notify the child’s parent of its decision to maintain, amend or cease the EHC Plan. Where the decision is to amend the EHC Plan, the council must then issue any final amended Plan within eight weeks of the ‘amendment notice’. Therefore, a final EHC Plan must be issued within 12 weeks of the review meeting.
14. Where a parent or young person disagrees with the contents of the EHC Plan there is a right of appeal to the Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) tribunal when the final Plan is issued.

What happened

15. Y has special educational needs (SEN), and he has an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. Y attended a primary school, School 1.
16. On 18 March 2024, an annual review of Y’s EHC Plan was completed. School 1 requested an increase in funding and amendments to the EHC Plan. The school submitted a report from an educational psychologist which recommended additional outcomes and enhanced provision, including specialist teaching input, smaller class sizes, increased staffing support and sensory provision. The Council confirmed it had received the annual review paperwork.
17. On 20 May 2025, School 1 asked the Council for an update on the outcome of the annual review process.
18. In June, School 1 contacted the Council again and said amendments arising from the annual review remained outstanding.
19. On 25 June, Miss Z complained to the Council and said it had failed to issue Y’s amended EHC Plan within statutory timescales. Miss Z explained the impact on Y had been significant and he had been without a legally accurate and updated EHC Plan during a critical period.
20. The Council apologised to Miss Z and said a draft amended Plan would be issued on 11 July.
21. Miss Z remained unsatisfied and asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage 2. She said the Council had failed to explain the reasons for a delay of 14 months in amending the Plan. Miss Z confirmed they had received the amended plan but said it had still not been amended properly. She said the provision in section F should be quantified and specified.
22. On 15 September, the Council responded to Miss Z’s complaint. It acknowledged the annual review had been significantly delayed and apologised. The Council said it could not explain why the amendments sent by School 1 were not acted upon at the time. It also apologised for the lack of communication and clarity throughout the review process. The Council upheld the complaint.
23. Miss Z remained unsatisfied and complained to the Ombudsman.
24. On 7 October, the Council issued a final amended EHC Plan. The following changes were made to the Plan following the annual review in March 2024:

• autism spectrum disorder as the primary need;
• sensory processing disorder;
• specialist teaching provision;
• smaller class expectations;
• enhanced staffing support; and
• specialist placement consideration

25. In its response to our enquiries, the Council confirmed:

• Y remained on roll at School 1, but his attendance deteriorated during 2025;
• a reduced timetable was implemented;
• the school reported increasing difficulty securing engagement in learning; and
• by Autumn 2025 Y was no longer attending school.

26. The Council has accepted there was avoidable delay in progressing the review recommendations and amendment process between receiving the annual review paperwork in March 2024 and issuing the final amended EHC Plan in October 2025. The Council has offered to pay Mrs X a total of £3100 to remedy the injustice caused by the fault.
27. The Council identified the following service improvements:

• enhanced monitoring of annual review timescales;
• improved management oversight of outstanding reviews;
• escalation arrangements where staff absence affects case progression; and
• improved tracking of amendment decisions and notices.

Analysis

28. I am investigating this complaint from March 2024 to September 2025, when Miss Z complained to the Ombudsman.
29. We will not generally reinvestigate complaints if we consider the Council has carried out a satisfactory investigation and where it has made an appropriate remedy. The Council upheld the complaint but there is no evidence it considered a suitable remedy for the injustice caused by the faults.
30. The Council should have issued its decision letter to amend Y’s EHC Plan on 15 April 2024 (4 weeks after the annual review meeting). The Council issued its decision letter on 16 July 2025. This was a significant delay, not in line with statutory timescale, and it was fault.
31. The Council should have issued Y’s final amended EHC Plan within the 12-week statutory timescale from the date the annual review meeting, by 10 June 2024. The Council issued Y’s final amended EHC Plan on 7 October 2025 with no named educational placement. This was a significant delay of 16 months, not in line with statutory timescale, and it was fault.
32. The final EHC Plan specifies the additional provision agreed following the annual review in March 2024. This is set out in paragraph 24 above. Y should have received this provision from June 2024, had the Council issued the Plan within statutory timescales. Although Y remained on roll at School 1, his attendance had deteriorated and he was on a reduced timetable. It has not been possible to determine the education and provision Y received between June 2024 and September 2025. However, it is clear he did not receive a full-time education and the enhanced provision set out in the final Plan. This was fault and also caused Mrs X uncertainty in not knowing whether the education provided to Y was suitable for his needs.
33. It is Miss Z’s view that had the Council completed the annual review process sooner, the Council would have sought a specialist placement sooner. The Council has confirmed that in its view, Y’s needs could be met in mainstream primary school and its view only changed when School 1 said otherwise. It said its view at the time of issuing the draft EHC Plan was that Y’s school remained suitable. This was a decision for the Council to make, and I cannot say that Y would have been in a specialist school sooner.
34. The Council already accepted and apologised for its poor communication with Mrs X. This lack of communication and clarity added to Mrs X’s distress.
35. When a young person has missed education because of fault by a council, we may recommend the council make a symbolic payment to acknowledge the education they have missed and help them to catch up. We usually recommend a payment of between £900 and £2,400 per term to acknowledge the impact of that loss on the child and the family.
36. In determining an appropriate level, we will take account of factors such as:
• the severity of the young person’s SEND as set out in the EHC Plan;
• any educational provision that was made during the period;
• whether additional provision now can remedy some or all of that loss; and
• whether the period affected was a significant one in a young person’s school career, for example the first year of compulsory education, the transfer to secondary school or the period preparing for public exams.

37. Given Y’s age, the stage of education at primary school and the level of education and provision that was provided, I consider a symbolic payment of £1,500 per term of missed provision would be appropriate. I have made a recommendation below outlining the total payment the Council will pay to remedy the education and provision Y missed and the distress and uncertainty caused to Mrs X.
38. Because the Council is already taking suitable steps to address its failings, I have not made any further service improvement recommendations.

Back to top

Action

39. Within one month of my final decision the Council will:
1. apologise in writing to Mrs X to acknowledge the injustice caused by the Council’s identified faults as set out above. The apology should be in accordance with our guidance, Making an effective apology.
2. make a symbolic payment of £4,500 to acknowledge the loss of suitable education and provision to Y and the distress and uncertainty caused to Mrs X.
40. Within two months of my final decision the Council should provide us with an update on its progress with the service improvements identified in paragraph 27 above.
41. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

42. I find fault causing injustice to Mrs X and Y. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.
43. I have completed my investigation on this basis.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman