Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s Education, Health and Care Plan annual review. This is because the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him £750, and this provides a suitable remedy for the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council delayed in completing his Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan annual review and failed to put in place suitable provision to meet his educational and special educational needs. His representative Ms Y says this caused distress, worry and anxiety.

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 effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms Y and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council held a meeting to discuss Mr X’s EHC Plan as part of the annual review process on 6 May 2025. The SEND Code of Practice required the Council to complete the process and notify Mr X/Ms Y whether it intended to maintain, amend or cease the Plan within four weeks. If it intended to amend the Plan, it should have done this within eight weeks, by 1 July 2025.
6. The Council initially proposed to cease Mr X’s EHC Plan but it took until August 2025 to consult on this proposal. It then accepted it should not cease the Plan but amend it instead. The Council took until 1 October 2025 to issue the amended EHC Plan.
7. Although the Council issued the amended EHC Plan three months later than it should have, a significant proportion of the delay took place over the summer holidays. This means the impact on Mr X was more limited than if it had taken place during term-time. Ms Y says Mr X missed six weeks of educational and special educational needs provision as a result of the delay, which equates to roughly half a term. As set out at Paragraph 1, Mr X/Ms Y also suffered distress, worry and anxiety, however this appears to be the result more of the Council’s initial proposal to cease the EHC Plan rather than the delay itself. The Council did not proceed with this proposal and had it done so, it would have been a matter for the appeals process rather than for us.
8. Our Guidance on Remedies sets out our approach to remedies for loss of educational provision and I have taken this into account in proposing a remedy for the injustice caused by the delay. The Council, to its credit, has agreed to my proposal and the remedy agreed is sufficient based on the circumstances of the case.

Back to top

Agreed actions

9. The Council has agreed to the following actions to remedy the complaint:
• Apologise to Mr X for the delay in completing his annual review;
• Pay Mr X £750 for the loss of educational and special educational needs provision resulting from its delay.
10. The Council will complete the agreed remedy within four weeks of the date of this decision.
11. I consider the remedy agreed by the Council is suitable and that it is unlikely further investigation would achieve significantly more for Mr X or Ms Y.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has agreed a suitable remedy for the injustice caused by its delay.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman