Council criticised for causing mother “avoidable distress” after delays in EHC plan process

The woman behind the complaint, Miss X, complained to the Ombudsman that the council did not follow the correct timescales in the EHC process. Due to the delays she reported, the council told her that she could commission her own Educational Psychologist's report.

However, after she did this, Miss X said the council told her that it would not use the report as it was commissioning its own.

Miss X said this impacted her by causing “unnecessary expense” in commissioning her own private EP report. It also impacted her child in having to go through the process twice and distress caused by the overall delays in the process.

Outlining the timeline of events, the Ombudsman said Miss X applied for an EHC needs assessment for her child in July 2024.

The council in August 2024 refused to carry out an assessment. Miss X appealed this decision in October 2024. In December 2024, the council agreed to carry out an assessment.

On a telephone call in January 2025, Miss X said the council told her that she could commission her own Educational Psychologist's (EP) report. She said that after the council missed a deadline in February 2025, she commissioned her own private EP report.

In March 2025, Essex told Miss X that it would not use the private EP report. However, in May 2025 the council reversed this decision and told Miss X that it would consider using her EP report.

In June 2025, a draft EHC plan was issued by the council which in part used Miss X’s EP report.

Analysing the case, the Ombudsman said: “Miss X says the council delayed carrying out an EHC needs assessment, and it delayed in issuing an EHC plan. As I set out [earlier in the report], the timescales the council had under the code of practice allow the council six weeks to decide whether to commission an assessment.

“The council by responding in August 2024 met this timescale, although I acknowledge that Miss X did not agree with the council’s determination about this. However, she was entitled to appeal this decision which she did in October 2024.”

The Ombudsman noted that once the council decided to carry out an assessment, in December 2024, it had 16 weeks to decide whether to issue an EHC Plan or refuse to do so.

Therefore, in this case, the council should have decided by April 2025, instead of June 2025 – a delay of two months in accordance with the code of practice.

The Ombudsman said: “I consider the council at fault for the delay in issuing a decision regarding the EHC plan. This would have impacted Miss X by causing her distress in the form of uncertainty as well as having to contact the council to request an update.”

The report added: “The distress Miss X experienced was also increased by the inconsistent response by the council into the EP report. The council has accepted in May 2025, that it gave the impression to Miss X that it would use her EP report if she commissioned one. It has since partially used Miss X’s EP report in the draft EHC plan.

“There is no requirement for the council to use a privately commissioned EP report. However, the evidence supports the council encouraged Miss X to commission one. It also shows the council went on to use it partially. The Ombudsman therefore considers it fair in these circumstances that the council should reimburse the cost incurred by Miss X.”

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

• provide a written apology to Miss X for the unnecessary and avoidable distress caused by the delays in the EHC plan process.
• pay £200 (£100 per month of delay) for the delay in the EHC plan process.
• pay £1,974.40 in reimbursement of the cost for the EP assessment.

According to the report, the council has agreed to the above actions.

A spokesperson for Essex County Council said: “While it would be inappropriate to comment on individual cases, we have acknowledged and accepted the recommendations made.

“Families can be confident we are taking this matter extremely seriously and already have plans in place to address the issue. Every child deserves the chance to thrive and improving the current situation as quickly as possible is our priority.”

Lottie Winson