Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in reviewing an Education, Health and Care plan. This is because any investigation by us could not achieve significantly more than the Council has already offered.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains the Council missed the statutory deadline for issuing an amended Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan for her child, who was moving from secondary school to post-16 education. She says this means her child started college without an EHC plan in place to cover all the support they needed. Mrs X says this caused uncertainty and distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

2. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
3. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mrs X’s child moved from secondary school to post-16 provision in September 2025. The Council should have reviewed their EHC plan and provided a final, amended version by 31 March 2025. The Council issued the final EHC plan in September 2025. The process was therefore subject to significant delay, exceeding the statutory timescale by some six months. As a result, the EHC plan was not in place in time for Mrs X’s child’s admission to the college.
5. The Council upheld part of Mrs X’s complaint and apologised for delays in the review process which meant her child’s EHC plan was not amended and finalised within the statutory timescale. It offered Mrs X a symbolic payment of £400 to recognise the delay, and for the stress and frustration caused. The Council also said it would make changes to its review process when young people with EHC plans move from secondary school to post-16 provision.
6. Mrs X further complains that the provision set in the EHC plan was not initially made when her daughter started college. The Council has set out that it was initially unaware that the college had not made the provision, but it acted to address the matter when it became aware.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because it has a ready been substantially upheld and an appropriate remedy offered. Where a complaint has been properly addressed and upheld before coming to us, we will not normally intervene. In this case, investigation by us would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome or achieve significantly more than the remedy offered by the Council. We will therefore not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because investigation is unlikely to achieve significantly more than the Council has already offered.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman