Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to arrange Mr Y’s special educational provision and comply with two tribunal decisions. This is because part of the complaint is late. For the more recent period we have considered, there is not enough evidence of fault or sufficient injustice to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains, on behalf of Mr Y, a young person, that the Council:
1. failed to arrange full-time educational provision, including the provision in Section F of Mr Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan) between September 2022 and October 2024;
2. failed to comply with SEND Tribunal orders from July 2021 and October 2024;
3. refused and failed to provide direct payments for privately arranged therapy between September 2022 and October 2024;
4. following a SEND Tribunal Order in October 2024, delayed responding to Mrs X’s request for a personal budget for speech and language therapy (SALT) and occupational therapy (OT); and,
5. poorly handled her complaint by ignoring clear breaches of the law.

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. 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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(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.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X first complained to the Ombudsman in November 2025. This means her complaint about Council action between July 2021 until the end of October 2024 is late. I have seen no good reasons for us to exercise discretion and consider matters prior to November 2024. Mrs X could have complained to us much sooner if she wished for us to consider these parts of her complaint. So, we will not investigate.
8. The Council created a signed version of Mr Y’s final EHC Plan on 7 November 2024. This was the date by which the Council had to issue the Plan to meet the five-week deadline following the SEND Tribunal Order of 3 October. The Council shared this with Mr Y’s College on the same day. Mrs X says the Council did not share the final Plan with her until 8 November. We will not investigate this matter. In the event the Council delayed sending Mrs X the Plan by one day, any injustice to Mr Y or Mrs X is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
9. The SEND Tribunal decided Mr Y should attend his College placement on a full-time basis, instead of three-days per week. Mrs X complains the Council delayed arranging Mr Y’s full-time placement. When the Council shared the final Plan with Mr Y’s College, it told the College Mr Y must attend on a full-time basis immediately and asked the College to confirm whether it could meet these requirements. In its complaint response, the Council said the College confirmed the next day on 8 November that the College could do so. In the event Mr Y’s full-time provision was delayed by one or two days, any injustice caused to Mr Y is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
10. Mrs X says Mr Y was unable to attend the College full-time until 18 November. She says this was due to the Council’s failure to promptly tell the College about the Tribunal’s decision. We recognise that it is not practical for councils to keep a ‘watching brief’ on whether schools are providing all the provision for every pupil with an EHC Plan all the time. In this case, the Council took suitable steps to make sure the College would provide full-time provision immediately. Within a day of issuing the Plan, the College confirmed it could do so. I have not seen evidence to suggest the Council was aware before 18 November that Mr Y was only attending three-days per week instead of full-time. For these reasons, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint the Council delayed responding to her requests for a personal budget and direct payments for SALT & OT provision. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating. This is based on the following:

• by the time of Mrs X’s complaint to the Council in November 2024, the Council had already agreed to Mrs X’s request for a personal budget and direct payments. The Council confirmed if there were any delays setting up the direct payments to Mrs X then it would backdate all funds to the date of the Order. By the time of the Council’s stage one response in December, the Council had already resolved the matter and set up payments to Mrs X; and,
• in January 2025, Mrs X first requested a personal budget and direct payments for OT provision. By the time of the Council’s stage two response in February, the Council had already agreed to Mrs X’s request.

12. Mrs X complains about issues with the Council’s handling of Mr Y’s draft amended EHC Plan following an annual review meeting in January 2025. We will not investigate this complaint because it is reasonable to give the Council the chance to do so first. If Mrs X remains unhappy with the Council’s final complaint response, it is open to her to contact us again.
13. It is not a proportionate use of our limited resources to investigate the Council’s complaint handling alone when we are not looking at the core matters complained about. So, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to arrange Mr Y’s special educational provision and comply with two tribunal decisions. This is because part of the complaint is late. For the more recent period we have considered, there is not enough evidence of fault or sufficient injustice to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman