Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed reviewing her son, Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. She also complained Y has had no education or EHC Plan provision since November 2025 and communication from the Council has been poor. Mrs X said this distressed Y and his family, and he missed education and EHC Plan provision. There was fault in the way the Council delayed issuing Y’s updated EHC Plan, it did not ensure Y received education and plan provision and communication was poor. This distressed the family and Y missed education and EHC Plan provision. The Council has already remedied this fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council delayed reviewing her son, Y’s EHC Plan. She also complained Y has had no education or EHC Plan provision since November 2025 and communication from the Council has been poor. Mrs X said this distressed Y and his family, and he missed education and EHC Plan provision.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a Council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
4. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have investigated Mrs X’s complaint about the EHC Plan delays, missed education and EHC Plan provision. This is the elements of the complaint the Council is responsible for.
6. I have not investigated any reference to the actions of the school. The Ombudsman does not have jurisdiction over the actions of schools.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I read Mrs X’s complaint and spoke to her about it on the phone.
8. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

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 make sure the child or young person receives the special educational provision set out in section F of an EHC Plan (Section 42 Children and Families Act). The Courts have said the duty to arrange this provision is owed personally to the child and is non-delegable. This means if the council asks another organisation to make the provision and that organisation fails to do so, the council remains liable (R v London Borough of Harrow ex parte M [1997] ELR 62), (R v North Tyneside Borough Council [2010] EWCA Civ 135)  
12. We accept it is not practical for councils to keep a ‘watching brief’ on whether schools and others 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. 

13. The council must arrange for the EHC Plan to be reviewed at least once a year to make sure it is up to date. The council must complete the review within 12 months of the first EHC Plan and within 12 months of any later reviews. The annual review begins with consulting the child’s parents or the young person and the educational placement. A review meeting must then take place. Following the review meeting the council must issue a decision to either amend, maintain or cease to maintain the EHC Plan. This must happen within four weeks of the meeting. (Section 20(10) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.176) 
14. If the council decides not to amend an EHC Plan or decides to cease to maintain it, it must inform the child’s parents or the young person of their right to appeal the decision to the tribunal.
15. Where the council proposes to amend an EHC Plan, the law says it must send the child’s parent or the young person a copy of the existing (non-amended) Plan and an accompanying notice providing details of the proposed amendments, including copies of any evidence to support the proposed changes. (Section 22(2) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.194). Case law sets out this should happen within four weeks of the date of the review meeting. Case law also found councils must issue the final amended EHC Plan within a further eight weeks.
16. There is a right of appeal to the Tribunal against a council’s:

• description of a child or young person’s SEN, the special educational provision specified, the school or placement or that no school or other placement is specified in their EHC Plan;
• amendment to these elements of an EHC Plan; and
• decision not to amend an EHC Plan following a review or reassessment

17. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that the council must arrange suitable alternative educational provision when it finds that a child is unable to attend school because of a permanent exclusion, an illness, or for any other reason which make the school inaccessible to the child. The alternative educational provision must be suitable to the child’s age, ability and aptitude, and any special educational needs they have.
18. If a council discovers a child is absent from school for an extended period, it should consider the reasons for this, and take account of evidence from relevant parties (such as the child’s school, parents, and medical professionals). It must then decide whether it has a duty to make alternative educational provision.
19. If a council wants to see medical or other evidence, it should ask for it at the earliest opportunity. The council should account for any challenges a parent might have in obtaining evidence, and review its position based on any new evidence it receives.
20. Councils should consider any attempts the school is making to support the child. This might involve sending work home for the child to complete, arranging disability related support, placing the child on a reduced timetable, or providing online education as a short-term measure. If there is a clear, effective, and time-bound plan for reintegration then there may be no immediate role for the council in providing alternative education.
21. If the council decides it must arrange alternative provision, it needs to arrange provision based on the child’s individual needs. It should also have a review process to ensure the provision remains in the child’s best interests. Councils can decide a child cannot cope with full-time provision, especially where the reason for their non-attendance is medical. When this happens, the Council should provide reasons for the amount of provision it arranges.
22. If a child has an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan the council also has an ongoing duty to arrange the support guaranteed by the Plan. However, this might not always be possible, such as where the SEN support is designed for the child’s normal classroom setting.

What happened

23. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
24. Y has an EHC Plan. The plan named school Z, an independent school. School Z reviewed the EHC Plan in July 2024. The Council confirmed it would maintain the plan in August 2024.
25. Mrs X asked the Council for an urgent review in March 2025. She stated Y needed a change of school.
26. Mrs X complained to the Council in June 2025. She complained the school failed to ensure Y received EHC Plan provision, failed to safeguard him, visited the family home without permission and breached data protection laws.
27. School Z reviewed Y’s EHC Plan in June 2025. School Z sent the annual review paperwork to the Council in July 2025. The Council asked school Z to provide further information in the review paperwork.
28. The Council responded to the complaint in July 2025, advising Mrs X to complain to school Z.
29. Mrs X asked the Council to escalate her complaint in August 2025. Mrs X added concerns about delays in the annual review process.
30. The Council responded to the complaint in September 2025. The response explained the Council asked school Z to provide more information after the annual review in June 2025. The Council provided a timeline of actions to review the EHC Plan.
31. School Z sent the additional information from the annual review to the Council in October 2025. School Z also told the Council it would end Y’s placement at the school at the end of November 2025.
32. The Council decided to amend Y’s EHC Plan and sent a draft plan to Mrs X in November 2025. Mrs X asked the Council to add information to the plan. The Council engaged with tutors and mentoring support to engage with Y when school Z ended the placement. Mentoring sessions started. The Council arranged for a tuition provider to engage with Y, but Mrs X asked for a different tutor.
33. School Z removed Y from its roll at the end of November 2025.
34. Mrs X complained to the Council in December 2025. She complained about delays in amending the EHC Plan and said the Council failed to provide education and EHC Plan provision since Y left school Z.
35. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint two weeks later. The response explained the Council set up interim measures for education and plan provision and would issue the EHC Plan as soon as possible.
36. Mrs X asked the Council to escalate her complaint at the end of December 2025. She said the response did not address her complaint or provide a remedy.
37. The Council issued a draft EHC Plan in January 2026. Mrs X provided comments and the Council issued a further draft EHC Plan in February 2026.
38. The Council issued the final EHC Plan in March 2026.
39. The Council issued its final complaint response a week later. The Council accepted it was at fault for breaching its statutory duty to issue Y’s amended EHC Plan within 12 weeks of the annual review meeting. The Council also accepted the mentoring support did not constitute full-time education. The Council apologised and offered a financial remedy of £900 for the time Y was out of school and £300 to acknowledge the family’s distress and inconvenience.
40. Mrs X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Mrs X would like the Council to apologise. Provide a financial remedy and improve its service.
41. In response to my enquiries the Council stated the £900 payment was for missed education and EHC Plan provision and the £300 was for distress. The Council accepted its communication was poor and detailed the action it was taking to improve its service.

My findings

Education and EHC Plan provision

42. Councils have a duty to provide alternative education under section 19 if there is no suitable education available to the child which is “reasonably practicable” for the child to access. The “acid test” is whether educational provision the council has offered is “available and accessible to the child”.
43. Y stopped attending school at the end of November 2025 because school Z removed him from its roll. The Council accepted it should have ensured Y received education and EHC Plan provision from December 2025. It did not. This is fault. Y missed education and EHC Plan provision from November 2025 until March 2026, when the Council issued its complaint response. This situation is ongoing, but the Council has to consider any concerns after this date before the Ombudsman can consider this matter further. The Council accepted this fault, apologised and paid Mrs X £900 to acknowledge Y missed one academic term of education and EHC Plan provision. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies and is suitable for the injustice the Council fault caused.

EHC Plan annual review

44. The Council ensured school Z reviewed Y’s EHC Plan in July 2024. School Z then reviewed the plan again in June 2025. This is within 12 months of the previous review, as required by the SEND regulations detailed in paragraph 13. The Council was not at fault.
45. After the June 2025 review meeting, the Council decided it would amend Y’s EHC Plan. It should have issued the final EHC Plan by September 2025. The Council issued the amended EHC Plan in March 2026, a six-month delay. The Ombudsman takes the view that councils must abide by the statutory and legislative requirements under the SEN legislation and guidance. The Council’s failure to meet the required timeframes here amounts to fault. This frustrated Mrs X’s right of appeal to the Tribunal.

Communication

46. The Council accepted its communication was poor. This is fault, distressing Mrs X. The Council has detailed the actions it is taking to improve its services.
47. The Council accepted the delay issuing the EHC Plan and poor communication was fault. It paid Mrs X £300 to remedy the distress its fault caused. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies and is suitable for the injustice the Council fault caused.

Back to top

Decision

48. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which the Council has already remedied.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman