Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to review and update her Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for many years. She says she wanted to return to education last year but was unable to because her EHC Plan was not up to date. The Council accepts it made mistakes and has offered to provide support to allow Ms X to complete the course even though she will be over 25. This is a good outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about her education. She complains the Council failed to review and update her Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for many years. She says she wanted to return to education last year but was unable to because her EHC Plan was not up to date.
2. Ms X complained to the Council. She is unhappy with the Council’s response.

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 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 injustice we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)
5. 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(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. I invited Ms X and the Council to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Ms X has an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan maintained by the Council.
8. Ms X complained to the Council on 23 January 2023. She complained that her EHC Plan had “lapsed” in 2017 and as it had not been updated, she did not have the right support to attend college.
9. The Council responded on 1 March 2023.
10. The Council accepted Ms X’s EHC Plan was out of date.
11. The Council said it should have formally closed (or ceased to maintain) Ms X’s EHC Plan in 2018 as she was not in education or training at the time. If it had done so, the Council said this would have avoided the confusion when Ms X said she wanted to return to education in 2022.
12. The Council agreed to review the plan straight away.
13. By the time of her complaint, however, Ms X was approaching 25. A young person cannot have an EHC Plan after the age of 25. Instead, the Council said it would fund support, equivalent to her EHC Plan, for the duration of the two-year course she had chosen.
14. Unhappy with the Council’s response, Ms X complained to the Ombudsman.

Consideration

15. The Council’s response to Ms X’s complaint is good. The Council recognised it had made mistakes and offered solutions.
16. Problems with Ms X’s education started a long time ago. Ms X was in care as a child. Children in care have a personal education plan which the Council must review every six months. The Council said it did not review Ms X’s personal education plan for the last 18 months she was in care.
17. As a care leaver, Ms X is entitled to support from the Council including the support of a personal advisor, the preparation of a pathway plan and, if needed, financial support. Support continues until Ms X is 25.
18. The Council said records showed Ms X had a pathway plan, a personal advisor and had received support between 2018 and 2021. However, the Council said it had not provided the support it should after 2021.
19. Ms X contacted her personal advisor in July 2021 and March 2022 with questions about further education. The Council said it should have reviewed her pathway plan and her EHC Plan at the time. It did not.
20. The Council apologised, agreed to review Ms X’s EHC Plan and offered support for the duration of her chosen two-year course.
21. Ms X does not consider the Council has done enough. If I have understood correctly, she wants compensation for the mistakes the Council has made. Ms X believes the Council should have reviewed her EHC Plan every year and this would have avoided many of the problems she has encountered.
22. Ms X is right that the Council must review an EHC Plan every year. But this does not mean things would have been different if it had. If the Council had done everything properly, it is likely it would have ended her EHC Plan when she was 18 and started it again when she wanted to return to college, probably in 2021 or 2022. This would have avoided the confusion and embarrassment caused by using an out-of-date EHC Plan. The Council apologised for the confusion and embarrassment and made a symbolic payment of £250. This is a good response. I cannot say things would have been different if the Council had reviewed Ms X’s EHC Plan every year.
23. The Ombudsman does not award compensation in the same way a court might. We make recommendations which try to put people back in the position they would have been in if fault by the Council had not occurred. Complaints to us must be made promptly, and normally within 12 months, because the longer an investigation takes place after the events complained about, the harder it is to establish exactly what happened, and the less likely we will be able to put people back in the position they would have been if we find fault.
24. With this in mind, I have considered what has happened since July 2021 when Ms X contacted her personal advisor to ask about further education. The Council says it should have reviewed her pathway plan and updated her EHC Plan. It is possible Ms X would have returned to college. She would have been entitled to support until she was 25. This would have allowed her to complete a two-year course. The Council has offered to provide support to allow Ms X to complete the course even though she will be over 25. In this way, the Council has done what the Ombudsman would recommend. It has taken action to put her back in the position she would have been in if the fault had not occurred. I think this is a good outcome, so I will end my investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

25. I have ended my investigation. The Council was at fault when it failed to review Ms X’s pathway plan and update her EHC Plan when she contacted her personal advisor in July 2021 to ask about further education. However, the Council has offered a suitable remedy.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman