A mother from Southwark has received a compensation payment of £4,000 from the local council after her son experienced a year without education due to his exclusion from college.
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman mandated Southwark Council to issue an apology to the family and to remind its staff of the proper procedures for reviewing Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans.
The mother, referred to as Ms. X in the Ombudsman report, was compensated for the loss of her son’s special educational services, including therapy, as well as the „avoidable“ distress and inconvenience caused by inadequate communication and delays in appeal rights.
Her son, identified as Mr. Y in the report, is an adult with special educational needs. He was attending a college designed for students with moderate to profound learning and physical disabilities when he was permanently excluded in January 2024.
In July 2024, the council issued a draft EHC Plan and consulted with an educational institution that indicated it could accommodate Mr. Y’s needs. However, Ms. X deemed this placement unsuitable.
Ms. X proposed an alternative organization, referred to as Centre B, but council officials did not pursue this option because it was classified as a social care day center rather than a registered educational provider.
In October 2024, the council issued another draft EHC Plan. Ms. X again requested consultation with a different organization, which was also not a registered educational provider. She subsequently suggested a college as a potential placement.
In December 2024, Ms. X met with council officers from the EHC team, and they agreed to consult with the college she had recommended. A consultation letter was dispatched in the last week of January 2025.
Mr. Y began receiving one-on-one tuition for ten hours a week starting in February 2025.
The council followed up with the college in mid-February regarding the consultation, but the college reported that it had no available spots until September 2025.
Mr. Y was offered a place for September, contingent upon the council’s agreement to fund it. The college also indicated that the council needed to amend his EHC plan and suggested modifications to his educational provision.
In January 2025, Ms. X lodged a complaint with the council. The council acknowledged her complaints, apologized for the delays, and offered her £1,800 for the educational services missed between January 2024 and January 2025.
Additionally, the council proposed £200 for missed therapies, £100 to account for the inconvenience caused by delayed appeal rights, and £100 for the distress and frustration stemming from poor communication.
The council explained that it could not assign a new case coordinator to Mr. Y due to staff shortages.
Unhappy with the council’s response, Ms. X escalated her complaint to the Ombudsman in June 2025. Mr. Y commenced a course at the new college in September 2025.
The council informed the Ombudsman that it had not issued Mr. Y’s amended final EHC Plan, meaning he had been operating under the same plan since June 2022.
In its findings, the Ombudsman stated that the council’s failure to act regarding the special educational provision violated its obligations under Section 42 of the Children and Families Act.
The council was also criticized for not maintaining a written record of Mr. Y’s annual review meeting in March 2024 and for failing to issue a final amended EHC Plan within the required 12-week timeframe.
The Ombudsman noted, „The council had the opportunity to issue a final amended plan in September 2024 as one placement had indicated it could meet Mr. Y’s needs. Although this was not Ms. X’s preferred option, it would have allowed Mr. Y to receive educational provision while providing Ms. X with appeal rights.“
It further added, „The council has yet to issue a final amended plan. This ongoing failure has resulted in avoidable frustration and a delay in appeal rights for the family.“
The council is expected to implement the actions agreed upon as outlined by the Ombudsman.
