Summary: We found there was a failure to provide Y with an education and the support required by his Education Health and Care Plan. There was also a failure to carry out statutory annual reviews in 2024 and 2025. The Council has apologised for its failings. We recommended a payment to recognise the impact on Y and the wider family.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that his son, Y, was not provided with the education and support set out in his Education Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan) from September 2023. He also complained that Y’s EHC Plan was not reviewed in 2024 or 2025. The Council upheld his complaint and accepted there had been a lack of education. It also accepted EHC Plan reviews had not taken place. However, Mr X complained the Council had not provided a suitable remedy to his complaint. He explained the impact upon Y and the family in general was severe.

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 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)
3. 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)
4. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

5. We have considered Mr X’s complaint from September 2023 to late 2025 when he complained to us.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Education Health and Care Plans (EHC Plans)

8. 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.
9. 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)  
10. 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. However, 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. 

EHC Plan Annual Reviews

11. The Council must arrange for an 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) 

Background

12. Mr X’s son, Y, has Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and moderate to severe communication and language difficulties. He also has Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) and he suffers with anxiety. As a result, Y has had an Education Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan) since 2016.
13. In May 2023, when Y was aged 16, Y’s EHC Plan was updated to name a new internship placement to provide work experience as part of Y’s transition to adulthood.

Mr X’s complaint

14. Mr X complained to the Council in July 2025 questioning the support that should be provided to Y. He also asked why Y’s EHC Plan had not been reviewed in 2024 or 2025. Mr X explained Y had not attended the new placement and that his mental health had been poor. He stated Y recently attempted suicide.
15. The Council stated that if a young person was not attending their named placement, the Council would usually be informed, and it would propose a review of their EHC Plan to ensure it could still meet their needs. It stated it had not received any communication from Y’s placement to indicate there was an issue. It noted the placement had agreed it could meet Y’s needs when originally consulted.
16. Mr X told the Council that Y had never enrolled with the placement provider and he was unclear why the Council would name a placement before it was confirmed. Mr X told us that the placement told him that the Council would have a list of all the students that were enrolled with them and there would generally be contact between the Council and provider every term. In Y’s case there had been no contact and Y had not enrolled or attended the placement. He had been without any education as a result.
17. The Council dealt with Mr X’s correspondence as a complaint and responded initially in September. The Council accepted that, had it proactively collected attendance information it would have been apparent that Y had not enrolled at his placement and an alternative placement may be needed. The Council also acknowledged that it failed to conduct EHC Plan reviews in 2024 or 2025.
18. The Council sincerely apologised for failing to meet its statutory duty to review Y’s plan and for the lack of provision between September 2023 and July 2025 (six terms). In addition to its apology, the Council offered to make a payment of £900 per term which could be used towards Y’s education, and £500 to reflect the lack of EHC Plan reviews. This was a total of £5,900. It also agreed to arrange an annual review of Y’s EHC Plan to organise a new placement. In the meantime, the Council stated it would make a referral for Y to receive tuition.
19. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s response. He noted in other cases a significantly higher sum had been paid to young people in Y’s circumstances.
20. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint further and with reference to our guidance for remedying complaints, the Council offered a payment of £2,300 per term, plus £500 for not carrying out EHC Plan reviews. This was a total of £14,300.
21. The Council stated it had been difficult to determine the extent of communication between the family and the Council during the period in question, but it acknowledged it had not taken sufficient steps to engage with them or arrange annual reviews.
22. Mr X remained unhappy with the Council’s response and he brought a complaint to us.
23. Mr X told us that a review of Y’s EHC Plan was taking place, but no tuition had been put in place as proposed in the Council’s complaint response. So, he noted Y had been out of education for seven terms to the end of 2025, not six. Mr X explained the period out of education had a significant impact on Y’s health, including a suicide attempt. He stated the deterioration in Y’s mental health and wellbeing had impacted him greatly and had a severe impact on the whole family.

What should have happened

24. As the Council has acknowledged in its complaint responses to Mr X, contact with the placement provider should have identified that Y was not enrolled in the placement named in his EHC Plan and this should have resulted in a review of his EHC Plan to establish if a different placement was required. This should have been established in the first term, in 2023. Because this was not established, Y went without the statutory support he needed. This was fault.
25. To compound the initial failure, there was then a failure to carry out the annual review of Y’s EHC Plan in both 2024 and 2025. This is also a statutory duty. The lack of reviews meant the opportunity to identify the situation and put it right was missed. This was also fault.
26. It seems evident that Y’s mental health was deteriorating in the period concerned and the family were finding this extremely difficult to deal with.
27. Where fault has resulted in a loss of educational provision, we will usually recommend a remedy payment of between £900 and £2,400 per term to acknowledge the harm caused by that loss. The figure should be based on the impact on the child and take account of factors such as:

• The severity of the child’s SEN as set out in their EHC plan.
• Any educational provision – full time or part time, that was made during the period.
• Whether additional provision can now remedy some or all of the loss.
• Whether the period concerned was a significant one for the child or young person’s school career – for example the first year of compulsory education, the transfer to secondary school, or the period preparing for public exams.
• Any lost or delayed rights of appeal to tribunal.

28. I recognise the Council has apologised to Mr X for the failures it identified. I welcome the Council’s reference to our guidance on remedy and for offering a payment to remedy the complaint based on our guidance. However, in view of the fact that Y has significant special educational needs, he received no education for the period concerned, this was a transitional year to an internship placement, and the impact to Y was severe, I consider the top of the remedy range is warranted, at £2,400 per term.
29. On the basis of the information we have received, Y has missed education for seven terms (including the term from September 2025 to December 2025). So, I have recommended that the Council pays Mr X, for Y, £16,800 for missed education. This includes the impact of the failure to do EHC Plan reviews.

Back to top

Action

30. Within four weeks of our final decision:
31. To recognise the failure to provide Y with an education and the support required by his Education Health and Care Plan between September 2023 and December 2025, and the failure to carry out annual reviews of his plan, the Council should pay Mr X, for Y, a total of £16,800.
32. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

33. I find fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman