Summary: We upheld this complaint about delays during the Education Health and Care Needs Assessment process. The Council upheld the complaint, apologised and offered a financial remedy of £2125. This is in line with our Guidance on Remedies and therefore we decided not to investigate. We will not investigate the remainder of the complaint about the Council’s failure to provide educational provision because it is premature.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council delayed issuing her child’s (Y) Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan and failed to provide education while Y was out of school.
2. Mrs X said the matters caused distress and a negative impact to Y’s education.

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 provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
5. 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

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. Mrs X asked the Council to carry out an EHC Needs Assessment for Y in March 2024.
9. Once it agreed to make an EHC Plan, the Council should have made the final EHC Plan within 20 weeks of the original application.
10. The Council issued Y’s EHC Plan in November 2025. The process took 86 weeks. This is 66 weeks longer than it should have taken. Mrs X therefore complained to the Council.
11. In its complaint response, the Council upheld the complaint and acknowledged the delays. It outlined improvements it had made to its service. It also apologised to Mrs X and offered a symbolic payment of £2125 to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty caused. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies.
12. Consequently, although we uphold this complaint, we will not investigate because an investigation is unlikely to achieve anything further.
13. Mrs X also complained about Y being out of education for a period during the EHC Needs Assessment process. Mrs X said Y did not receive any educational provision during this time.
14. Before it offered a resolution at stage two for the EHC Needs Assessment delays, the Council invited Mrs X to raise these concerns as a separate complaint with its customer feedback team. I have seen no evidence to suggest this happened.
15. As outlined in paragraph four, we cannot investigate where we are not satisfied the Council has had an opportunity to investigate and respond. This part of the complaint is therefore premature and we will not investigate. It is open to Mrs X to raise these matters with the Council as a new complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We upheld Mrs X’s complaint because the Council upheld the complaint and offered a suitable remedy and the remainder of the complaint is premature.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman