Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of an Education Health Care Needs Assessment. This is because there is not enough evidence the Council is at fault and that any fault has caused significant enough injustice to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains about the Council’s handling of her child’s Education Health Care Needs Assessment (EHCNA). She says the delays in the process meant her child was not issued with an Education Health and Care (EHC) plan in accordance with the statutory timescales in the Special Educational Needs Code.

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 cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
5. 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.

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. Miss X says the Council delayed carrying out an EHCNA which meant her child did not have an EHC plan for 18 months. Miss X says she was forced to fund her child’s placement at an independent school due to the Council’s delay and is asking for the fees she incurred to be refunded to her by the Council.
9. Miss X requested the Council carry out an EHCNA for her child in December 2023. The Council refused the request and Miss X appealed the decision to the Tribunal. We cannot investigate this part of the complaint as it is late and there are no good reasons why Miss X could not have complained to us sooner. Furthermore, we cannot investigate where someone has appealed to the Tribunal.
10. Following the Tribunal, the Council carried out the EHCNA and decided an EHC plan was necessary. The Council did assessments, however due to a delay with the educational psychology report, the final EHC plan was late. Miss X asked for more time to consider the content of the draft plan and a further two weeks was added to the timeframe. This meant the final EHC plan was seven weeks late. This delay did not cause significant enough injustice to justify the Ombudsman’s involvement.
11. Miss X says the SEN Code timescales should start from when the needs assessment was first requested, however the Council has taken the date from the Tribunal outcome. This is in line with the SEN Code and the Ombudsman would not criticise the Council as there is not enough evidence of fault here.
12. Miss X says she had discussions with the Council about home to school transport. The evidence does not show the Council has removed Miss X’s right to apply for transport and therefore there is not enough fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman