Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to secure a placement for his daughter, Y, and it left her without an education and specialist provision. He also complained about the Council’s delays after Y’s annual review and that it mishandled the consultation process. We find the Council was at fault for its failure to provide Y with an education and specialist provision when the new term started. It was also at fault for the delays following Y’s annual review and for how it handled the consultation process. The Council apologised, paid Mr X £2,700 and reimbursed the money he spent on Y’s therapy. The Council has agreed to our further recommendation to finalise Y's Education, Health and Care Plan.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to secure a placement for his daughter, Y, and it left her without an education and specialist provision. He also says the Council delayed finalising Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan after an annual review and it mishandled the consultation process.
2. Mr X says the Council’s fault have caused significant physical and emotional distress for Y and the whole family. He also says Y missed out on crucial education and provision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. My investigation covers matters from December 2024 to the end of October 2025. Mr X will need to raise a new complaint to the Council if he has concerns about its actions after November 2025.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mr 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

Special educational needs

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)  

Reviewing EHC Plans

12. 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) 
13. 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.

Alternative Provision

14. 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.

What happened

15. Y has special educational needs and an EHC Plan. Mr X previously funded Y’s place at an independent school.
16. The Council held an annual review of Y’s EHC Plan in December 2024.
17. Y was due to leave her school in July 2025. Mr X told the Council Y had attended an assessment at another independent school (School X) in June 2025. The Council said it would be open to consulting with School X, but it asked if Mr X would fund the placement.
18. Mr X complained to the Council in early July. He said it had named a school (School Z) in Y’s EHC Plan. He had spoken to School Z, and it could not meet Y’s needs. He said the Council consulted with School Z over a year ago, and School Z had since undergone significant changes. He said the Council had failed to consult with School X even though it had confirmed it could meet Y’s needs. The Council responded and said Mr X’s concerns fell outside its complaint procedure. It could not determine or allocate a school place within its complaint procedure. It signposted Mr X to the appeal route if he remained unhappy with Y’s EHC Plan.
19. Mr X emailed the Council and said he could not afford to fund a placement at School X. He sent a further email and said his complaint was about the Council’s failure to consult with School X and School Z. He said Y did not have an educational placement for September.
20. School Z said it could not meet Y’s needs. The Council therefore sent a consultation to School X in early August. School X raised some concerns about meeting Y’s needs. The Council agreed to fund an occupational therapy (OT) assessment for Y. School X would then review the assessment and decide whether it could meet Y’s needs.
21. Mr X emailed the Council in late August and provided it with a proposal for Y’s education until it could sort out a placement for her.
22. Mr X complained to the Council in early September about its delay in consulting with School X and its failure to secure a placement for Y. He said Y did not have any provision in place.
23. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint in mid-September. It said it should have taken proactive steps to ensure Y had a place available at School Z. If it had discussed matters with School Z earlier, it could then have taken steps to consult with other settings before the new term. It also said it had made some online alternative provision available for Y. However, she had not accessed it.
24. Mr X referred his complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaints procedure. He said the Council provided School Z with the paperwork in July 2025, two days before the end of term. He said School Z confirmed only a verbal conversation took place in 2024. Therefore, he was confused why it told him it would name School Z in Y’s EHC Plan. He said the online alternative provision was not suitable for Y because she needed an adult to support her and facilitate online tutoring. This was not possible as both him and his wife would be returning to full time work. He said Y was still without an appropriate education.
25. The Council emailed Mr X and provided a list of providers that could provide Y with interim education. Mr X responded and said he was happy with most of the providers. He said he wanted Y to have a fulltime education outside of the home.
26. The Council said it only offered home tuition, and it could only use providers that had been through its onboarding process. However, if Mr X had a provider in mind that had been through this process it would consider it.
27. The Council sent Mr X another email and said a placement at School X had been agreed. However, it would need to sort out funding and therapy provision.
28. Mr X emailed the Council in late September and said Y was still without an education. He sent a further email in early October. He asked for a timeline for finalising the funding agreement with School X and proving Y with an interim education.
29. The Council failed to respond to Mr X’s email. He sent a follow up email and said he had started providing Y with OT and speech and language therapy (SALT). He said he would provide the Council with the invoices. The therapists would provide Y with catch up provision for the therapy she missed and then continue as normal.
30. The Council issued its final response to Mr X’s complaint in late October. It said Y had not received an education and the specialist provision in her EHC Plan since September. It was sorry for the frustration and uncertainty the family had experienced. It agreed to consider a symbolic financial remedy for Y’s missed education and provision. It also said it would consider a financial remedy to reflect the delays in completing the annual review. It would consider reimbursing Mr X for the SALT he had paid for, and it would agree catch up provision for Y’s OT. Finally, it said it would issue Y’s final EHC Plan, and it would update Mr X when Y’s alternative provision could start or the start date at School X, whichever was available first.
31. The Council emailed Mr X in late October and offered him £700 for the frustration and uncertainty caused by the delays in the annual review process. It also offered £2,000 for Y’s missed education and provision from September to November 2025. It said it was considering reimbursement for the other matters.
32. Mr X said he would accept the interim payment, but it was not sufficient to remedy his and his family’s injustice.
33. Mr X referred his complaint to the Ombudsman in early November.

Back to top

Analysis

34. The Council held Y’s annual review in December 2024. As it intended to amend her EHC Plan, it should have issued a final Plan within 12 weeks. The Council failed to do this. This is fault.
35. The Council spoke to School Z about Y in 2024. However, it failed to follow matters up and send any paperwork to School Z until July 2025. This is a significant delay and is fault. School Z then confirmed it was not offering Y a place, and the Council then consulted with School X. If the Council had consulted with School Z earlier, it could then have taken steps to consult with other settings, such as School X, in a timely manner.
36. The Council was aware Y did not have a school placement for September 2025. It had a duty under Section 42 of the Children and Families Act to provide Y with the special educational provision in her EHC Plan. It also had a simultaneous duty under section 19 to arrange a suitable education for her. The Council failed to act in line with these duties. This is fault.
37. The Council’s faults outlined above have caused Y a significant injustice. She went without the education and specialist provision he was legally entitled to. Children have a right to an effective education and time they miss is difficult to replace later.
38. The Council’s faults have also caused Mr X a significant injustice. He was caused frustration and distress that Y did not receive what she was entitled to. He had to take on additional caring responsibilities during this time. His appeal rights to the Tribunal have also been frustrated.
39. The Council acknowledged its faults when it responded to Mr X’s complaint. It apologised and paid Mr X £2,700 to reflect Y’s lost education and provision and the frustration and uncertainty caused by the delays in the annual review process. Mr X also confirmed the Council has reimbursed him for the SALT and OT he paid for, and Y’s alternative provision shortly after he referred his complaint to us.
40. I welcome the action the Council has taken. It has provided a financial remedy that is over and above our guidance on remedies for the injustice caused by fault and for the timeframe I have investigated. Therefore, I make no further financial recommendations.
41. Mr X says he been unable to work and has therefore suffered a loss of earnings. We do not normally recommend remedies that reimburse loss of earnings. Such payments are therefore best resolved by the courts.
42. While I make no further financial recommendations, the Council still has not finalised Y’s EHC Plan. This has been outstanding since the December 2024 annual review. Therefore, the Council should issue Y’s final EHC Plan. This will provide Mr X with his appeal rights to the Tribunal if he remains dissatisfied with the content of Y’s EHC Plan.
43. We have highlighted similar faults in other investigations and have asked the Council to take steps to improve its services. This includes sharing our decisions with its education team, issuing written reminders to staff about the Council’s legal duties and creating action plans to prevent a recurrence of the fault. I have therefore not made any further service improvement recommendations.

Back to top

Action

44. By 7 September 2026 the Council will issue Y’s final EHC Plan.
45. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above action.

Back to top

Decision

46. There was fault by the Council, which caused Mr X and Y an injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendation and so I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman