Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a lack of special education provision. The Council investigated Miss X’s concerns and said it would organise an annual Education, Health, and Care Plan review for Miss X’s child. Given these actions, it is unlikely we would find fault with the Council’s response and we cannot achieve what Miss X is looking for.

The complaint

1. Miss X said the Council did not do enough to ensure her son (Y), was receiving all the special education provision (SEP), he was due, as outlined in his Education, Health, and Care (EHC) Plan. Miss X also said the Council did not do enough to consider an alternative, specialist setting, for Y.
2. Miss X said this has significantly set Y back in his development and wants the Council to provide Y with one-to-one support, while at school, and to find a different setting for him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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.
4. 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, we cannot achieve what someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Y is a child on an EHC Plan. Miss X contacted the Council, because at the start of the new academic term in 2025, Y’s school changed the level of support it provided to Y. Miss X said Y’s EHC said Y should receive one-to-one support and the school disagreed.
9. The Council investigated and did not uphold Miss X’s complaint. It said it was satisfied the school was providing Y’s SEP and the dispute hinged on the interpretation of how Y would receive teaching support. The Council said the wording was open to interpretation and said it would arrange an annual EHC review. It said following this, after it issued a final EHC Plan, Miss X could appeal the content if she was unhappy.
10. From the information Miss X provided, the Council arranged an annual review, and it is presently consulting over changes to the draft amended EHC Plan, before it issues a final. This will then provide Miss X with a right to appeal the SEP to the Tribunal to resolve her dispute.
11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. On the disputed wording of Y’s EHC Plan, it is unlikely I would find fault in the Council saying the provision is open to interpretation. Moreover, in cases where the Council is aware of concerns relating to how an EHC Plan is being delivered, we expect it to investigate, and in Miss X’s case, it did so. Additionally, if we were to investigate such a complaint, we would also recommend the Council arrange for an emergency EHC review where it could not resolve a dispute, and the Council has done so in Miss X’s case.
12. Finally, Miss X has asked the Council ensure Y has one-to-one support in line with how she has always understood his EHC Plan to be. She also wants the Council to secure an alternative school placement, if Y’s current school, cannot provide this. We cannot direct this; only the Tribunal can and so we cannot achieve what Miss X is looking for.
13. When I discussed the complaint with Miss X, she said Y was not attending school and receiving limited support from school. I have not considered this part of Miss X’s complaint, because some of the matters occurred after the Council’s final complaint response and therefore, the restriction at paragraph five applies. It is then open to Miss X to complain to us again after she receives the Council’s final response to that matter.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault and we cannot achieve what she is looking for.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman