Ombudsman recommends £11,000 payout after London borough did not ensure young person received provision in EHC Plan

The woman behind the complaint, Miss X, complained that the council had not provided any Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan provision for her son, Mr Y, since late 2023 and had not reviewed the plan in this time.

She also complained about poor communication and said the council did not respond to her complaint. Miss X said this distressed her, and that Mr Y missed education and EHC Plan provision.

Miss X told the Ombudsman she had contacted the council several times during 2024 to ask about provision. She asked for an urgent review in August 2024.

Miss X complained to the council in January 2025. She complained that it had ignored her request for support and that Mr Y had not received the support detailed in the EHC Plan.

The London borough apologised for poor communication and said it would review the EHC Plan within four weeks.

According to the report, the council reviewed the EHC Plan in May 2025. The council agreed to amend the EHC Plan and sent an amended draft plan at the end of May 2025.

Miss X chased the council for a response to her complaint in August 2025.

The council issued an updated final EHC Plan in September 2025.

Miss X was not satisfied with the council’s response and asked the Ombudsman to investigate.

Analysing the complaint, the Ombudsman said: “When the council issued Mr Y’s EHC Plan, it had a duty to secure the special educational provision in the plan (Section 42 Children and Families Act). The council was aware Mr Y was not attending a setting from late 2023, so was not receiving the provision in the EHC Plan.

“The Ombudsman takes the view that councils must abide by the statutory and legislative requirements under the SEN legislation and guidance. The council accepted, in its response to my enquiries, it had not ensured Mr Y received the provision detailed in his EHC Plan from January 2024 to August 2025, 20 months. The council’s failure to ensure Mr Y received the provision in the plan is fault.”

Looking at the issue of complaint handling, the Ombudsman said: “In response to my enquiries, the council said it could not find evidence of a complaint in January 2025. I have seen evidence of a complaint from January 2025 titled “complaint regarding failure to provide adequate academic and mental health support” for Mr Y.

“The council also responded to this document agreeing to review the EHC Plan. I have seen no evidence the council responded to the complaint. This is fault, frustrating Miss X.”

To remedy the injustice caused, the council was recommended to:

• Apologise to Miss X and Mr Y for not ensuring Mr Y received the provision in his EHC Plan, not reviewing the plan, poor communication and poor complaint handling.
• Pay Miss X the £500 it offered to recognise the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by not reviewing Mr Y’s EHC Plan, poor communication and poor complaint handling.
• Pay Miss X the £11,160 it offered to for not ensuring Mr Y received the education and provision detailed in his EHC Plan for 20 months. This money should be used for Mr Y’s benefit.
• Provide guidance to relevant officers to remind them of the importance of accurate record keeping.

The London Borough of Bromley has been approached for comment.

Lottie Winson