Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her child’s education. Some of the complaint is late and it was reasonable for Miss X to use her right of appeal. The rest of the complaint is outside our jurisdiction because Miss X appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability).

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, complained about the Council’s handling of her child’s (Y) education. Miss X complained the Council refused her requests it assess Y for an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan). Miss X is unhappy with the school’s named by the Council when it agreed to issue Y with an EHC Plan. Miss X says the Council’s actions led to delay in finding Y a suitable school and resulted in a lack of education. Miss X is unhappy with how the Council dealt with her complaint. Miss X’s mother (Mrs Y) acted as her representative when complaining to the Council and the Ombudsman.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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)
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. The courts have established that if someone has appealed to the Tribunal, then we cannot investigate any matter which was part of, was connected to, or could have been part of, the appeal to the tribunal. (R (on application of Milburn) v Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman [2023] EWCA Civ 207).
6. This means that if a child or young person is not attending school, and we decide the reason for non-attendance is linked to, or is a consequence of, a parent or young person’s disagreement about the special educational provision or the educational placement in the EHC Plan, we cannot investigate a lack of special educational provision, or alternative educational provision.
7. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. We will not start an investigation into Miss X’s complaint. The reasons for this are below.
11. The Council initially refused Miss X’s requests it assess Y for an EHC Plan in January and July 2024. Miss X is unhappy the Council refused her requests. Miss X complained to the Ombudsman in October 2025.
12. The Ombudsman normally expects people to complain to us within twelve months of them becoming aware of a problem. Miss X’s complaint about these points is therefore late. We look at each complaint individually, and on its merits, considering the circumstances of each case. But we do not exercise discretion to accept a late complaint unless there are good reasons to do so. I do not consider that to be the case here. Miss X could have complained much earlier and so we will not investigate.
13. Even if we treated the above points as on time, we would not investigate. That is because parents who want to challenge a decision not to assess their child for an EHC Plan have a right of appeal to the Tribunal. It is the method set up by Parliament for parents to challenge such a decision. The Tribunal can order a council to carry out an assessment; we cannot. It was therefore reasonable for Miss X to use her right of appeal. When that is the case, our involvement is not appropriate.
14. Following Miss X’s July 2024 request for an assessment and its initial refusal, the Council changed its decision. It agreed to assess Y for an EHC Plan and in November 2024 agreed to issue an EHC Plan. Miss X is unhappy with the content of the EHC Plans the Council then issued. Miss X says the schools named were inappropriate and left Y without a suitable education. Miss X says the Council could have named a suitable school much earlier but did not do so until September 2025. Miss X appealed to the Tribunal in January 2025 to challenge the Council’s decision.
15. The law is clear that when a parent has used their right of appeal, we have no powers to consider the matter appealed or anything closely linked. This includes the school named, if appealed, how it was decided, the actions of council officers during the appeal, or any claimed lack of education linked to, or as a consequence of the matter appealed. This exclusion applies from when the appeal rights were available and until the appeal was settled – either by the Tribunal deciding the case or a consent order.
16. The above applies here and we therefore have no powers to consider Miss X’s complaint about what happened between November 2024 and September 2025. We have no discretion on this matter.
17. In her complaint to the Ombudsman Miss X says there have been issues since the Council agreed to name her preferred school. Miss X says Y cannot attend due to the impact of the Council’s previous actions. That needs to be put to the Council as a fresh complaint before we could decide if our involvement was appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because. Some of it is late and the rest of the complaint is outside our jurisdiction due to appeal rights which were either available or have been used.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman