Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council issued the complainant’s child’s Education Health and Care plan without incorporating amendments she submitted, and has failed to communicate appropriately with her subsequently. This is because the complaint has been substantially upheld and investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to lead to a significantly different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains that the Council issued her child’s Education Health and Care plan without incorporating amendments she submitted, and has failed to communicate appropriately with her subsequently.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X’s child has an Education Health and Care (EHC) plan which was issued in February 2025. Ms X says that she was offered the opportunity to ask for amendments before the EHC plan was issued in final form, and did so. She complains that the Council failed to incorporate her suggested amendments.
8. Ms X says the Council has subsequently failed to make the amendments and has failed to communicate with her properly. She says that, as a result, the EHC plan remains inaccurate and her child has not been given a place at a school or alternative provision.
9. In response to Miss X’s complaint, the Council accepted that its communication in the period after the EHC plan was issued had been flawed. It further identified that its response to her complaint had been subject to delay. It apologised to Ms X and offered her a symbolic payment in recognition of its fault.
10. The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is unlikely our intervention would lead to a different outcome. Her complaint about the failure to make amendments to the EHC plan has already been substantially upheld. We will not normally investigate complaints which have already been upheld. It is not a good use of our resources to do so.
11. If Ms X is unhappy with the content of her child’s EHC plan, including the school or type of school named, her recourse is to use her right to appeal to the Tribunal, and it would have been reasonable for her to do so in this case. There is no role for the Ombudsman. If the Council failed to provide education at phase transfer in September 2025, Ms X may wish to complain about this to the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is unlikely our intervention would lead to a significantly different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman