Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions in securing Special Education Provision in a young person’s Education, Health, and Care Plan. It is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complained on behalf of her son (X), the Council changed X’s education provider without her agreement. She said this meant X was left without a suitable education provider and therefore the Council did not secure his Special Education Provision (SEP), in his Education, Health, and Care (EHC) Plan.
2. Mrs Y said this has impacted on X’s development and caused him to regress educationally.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. In March 2025, the Council wrote to Mrs Y and told her it intended to cease to maintain X’s EHC Plan. It also told her it intended to stop X’s education provision at the end of that academic year (July 2025).
8. Mrs Y wrote to the Council and asked it to reconsider its decision. Additionally, X’s education provider also wrote to the Council and made representations about this decision. Mrs Y appealed to the Tribunal about the Council’s decision here.
9. Notwithstanding Mrs Y’s appeal, where an appeal has been lodged with the Tribunal, the Council still has a duty to secure the SEP in an EHC Plan, until the Tribunal decides either if the Council’s decision was right, or overturn its decision.
10. The Council provided information about the steps it took to secure an education provider, albeit a different provider, for the following academic year. On the evidence I have seen, Mrs Y declined to take up this offer, stating she had not agreed to it and believed it was not suitable for X.
11. Given the Council had planned for a provider, to secure X’s SEP, in line with his EHC Plan, it is unlikely we would find in the Council’s actions and so will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman