Summary: Mr X complained that the Council failed to secure the provision set out in his son B’s Education, Health and Care Plan when he was receiving alternative educational provision. We found the Council at fault for failing to secure some of the special educational provision specified in B’s Plan. We recommend that the Council apologises and pays a symbolic remedy to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that the London Borough of Hillingdon (the Council) failed to secure the provision set out in his son B’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan when he was receiving alternative educational provision. He said it failed to ensure suitable equipment and support were in place, and this left B unable to properly access education or complete exams, causing lost educational opportunity and distress.

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 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)
3. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
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. I have investigated events from January 2025 to October 2025. This is because Mr X's complaint is about the alternative educational provision arranged by the Council from January 2025 onwards. Although B stopped attending college in September 2024, that earlier period was not the focus of Mr X's complaint to either the Council or the Ombudsman. Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman in October 2025.
7. Mr X has the right to appeal against the contents of B's EHC Plan, including the special educational provision specified and the placement named in the Plan. I consider it would be reasonable for Mr X to exercise that right if needed. Therefore, I have not investigated the contents of B's EHC Plan or whether the placement named was suitable. However, I have considered whether the Council secured the provision specified in the EHC Plan.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
10. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

EHC Plan 

11. 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.
12. There is a right of appeal to the Tribunal against the special educational provision specified and the school or placement specified in a child’s EHC Plan. 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. 

Council duty to secure provision in an EHC Plan

13. Section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014 places a duty on councils to secure the special educational provision specified in Section F of an EHC Plan. This duty is owed personally to the child or young person and cannot be delegated to another organisation. If a council commissions a school, college or alternative provider to deliver the provision and that provision is not provided, the council remains responsible.
14. We accept it is not practical for councils to keep a ‘watching brief’ on whether placements are providing all the special educational provision in section F for every pupil with an EHC Plan. We consider councils should be able to demonstrate appropriate oversight in gathering information to fulfil their legal duty. At a minimum we expect them to have systems in place to:

• check the special educational provision is in place when a new or amended EHC Plan is issued or there is a change in educational placement;
• check the provision at least annually during the EHC review process; and
• quickly investigate and act on complaints or concerns raised that the provision is not in place at any time.

15. Where a child or young person with an EHC Plan is educated other than at their usual placement, the council continues to have an ongoing duty to arrange the support listed in the EHC Plan. While some provision may need to be adapted because it was designed with a classroom setting in mind, the council should consider how the provision specified in the EHC Plan will continue to be delivered. Councils should be able to demonstrate they have taken appropriate steps to satisfy themselves that the provision specified in an EHC Plan is in place, particularly when educational arrangements change or concerns are raised that provision is missing.
16. We publish good practice guidance on how we expect councils to fulfil their responsibilities to identify and arrange alternative educational provision, including provision listed in a child’s EHC Plan: Supporting children out of school (October 2025)

What happened

17. B has significant physical disabilities and special educational needs. He has an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The EHC Plan included provision relating to technology to support B's learning, including access to a laptop and assistive technology, together with examination support.
18. In autumn 2024, B stopped attending his college placement. The college told the Council it could not meet B's needs.
19. The Council held an annual review meeting about B’s EHC Plan in January 2025. At this meeting Mr X raised concerns that B had been out of full-time education for a significant period. The college confirmed that it was unable to meet B’s needs, in part due to a lack of appropriate equipment to help manage his complex physical needs. The Council agreed to source alternative educational provision for B in the form of home tutoring.
20. In February 2025 the Council secured one to one home tuition for B. In May 2025, the Council issued an amended final EHC Plan which continued to name the same college placement as the previous Plan.
21. Mr X said B did not receive some of the equipment, resources and support he needed while receiving tuition. In particular, he said textbooks were provided late and B did not have access to suitable technology to support his learning and prepare for examinations.
22. In summer 2025, the tuition provider informed Mr X that B would be sitting examinations. Around this time, Mr X also learned that the arrangements for supporting B during the examinations would differ from those previously expected.
23. Mr X told the Council that B had not been provided with a laptop. The Council then provided a laptop. However, issues arose because the laptop did not have the necessary software installed and B had not met the person who would be supporting him during the examinations.
24. Because of these difficulties, some examinations were rescheduled. The tuition provider later arranged for software to be installed and for B to meet the person who would support him before the rearranged examinations took place.
25. Mr X complained to the Council. He said B had not received the support and resources he needed while receiving tuition and that problems with equipment and examination arrangements had affected B's ability to sit examinations.
26. The Council responded through its complaints procedure. It said it had not been aware of some of the issues until Mr X raised them. It said it would discuss concerns about the examination arrangements and other matters with the tuition provider.

Analysis

27. The Council had a duty under section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014 to secure the special educational provision specified in Section F of B's EHC Plan. Although the Council arranged B's tuition through an external provider, responsibility for ensuring provision specified in the EHC Plan was in place remained with the Council.
28. B received educational provision at home between February and July 2025, so he was not entirely without education during this period. However, some of the support specified in his EHC Plan was not available during this period. B's Plan included provision relating to access to appropriate technology and support to enable him to participate in learning and examinations. The evidence shows some of the support specified in B's EHC Plan was either not in place or not available when required. This affected B's ability to fully access and benefit from the tuition provided. B also experienced difficulties accessing examinations because of problems with technology and examination arrangements. Given the Council's non-delegable duty under section 42, this was fault which caused avoidable distress and frustration at an important stage of B's education.
29. The Council said it supplied the provider with B's EHC Plan, remained in contact with the family and monitored the provision. However, both the Council's complaint responses and its response to my enquiries relied heavily on the argument that it was unaware of the problems until Mr X reported them in July 2025. The Council accepted some aspects of the support provided to B did not meet the standards it expected and apologised. However, I do not consider this apology alone is sufficient to remedy the injustice caused. I therefore recommend that the Council make a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice caused.

Back to top

Action

30. In recognition of the injustice caused to Mr X and B, I recommend, within one month of the final decision, the Council should:
• Apologise to Mr X and B in accordance with our guidance on making an effective apology.
• Pay £500 to Mr X, to acknowledge the avoidable distress and frustration caused.
31. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

32. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman