How do local authorities handle SEND complaints?

Local authorities handle SEND complaints through their corporate complaints procedure (usually two stages), then the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman; appealable EHCP decisions go to the SEND Tribunal instead. Getting that split right at the point of triage is what saves the family time and the council an avoidable upheld finding.

The corporate procedure, not the social-care one

SEND and education complaints run through the council's ordinary corporate complaints procedure, not the Children Act 1989 statutory three-stage children's-social-care process. That three-stage route (local resolution, independent investigation, then a review panel) is for children's social care only. Routing a SEND complaint into it is a common error on parent-facing pages, and it sets the family's expectations wrong before anyone has read the file. A corporate procedure typically runs in two stages:

1. Stage 1 — local resolution by the responsible service or team manager.
2. Stage 2 — a more formal, more independent investigation where the complainant is still dissatisfied.

Then the Ombudsman

Once the council's own process is exhausted, a complainant who is still unhappy can escalate to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO). The Ombudsman is free and independent, and investigates maladministration causing injustice — the kind of SEND failures it looks at include missed legal EHC assessment or plan deadlines, failure to deliver the provision named in Section F of a plan, and failure to arrange home-to-school transport. Two limits matter for triage: the complainant normally has to finish the council's own process first, and they normally have to come to the Ombudsman within 12 months of becoming aware of the matter. The council is usually allowed a reasonable chance to respond first. The LGSCO sets out how to complain on its own site.

The boundary that decides the route

Here is the line that catches councils out. A matter that carries a right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (SEND) must go to the Tribunal, not the complaints procedure, and the Ombudsman is barred by law from investigating it. Appealable matters include:

• a refusal to carry out an EHC needs assessment;
• a refusal to issue an EHC plan;
• the description of needs in Section B;
• the special educational provision in Section F;
• the school or placement named in Section I.

So the triage question is not how upset is the family but is this a service or process failure, or an appealable decision? A late plan or undelivered provision is a complaint, and can reach the Ombudsman. A refusal, or a dispute over what Sections B, F or I say, is an appeal. Disagreement resolution and mediation are available alongside all of this and do not have to be tried first, though mediation must be considered before most EHC-plan appeals are registered.

The LA's own duty

The council has to publish a clear complaints procedure, and set out the redress routes in its Local Offer, so families can find the right path. Worth noting the direction of travel: the 2026 Schools White Paper and the Education for All Bill propose a new statutory Individual Support Plan duty and narrower EHCPs from 2035, but they do not change today's framework — corporate procedure to LGSCO for complaints, SEND Tribunal for appeals. See the LA's role in SEND mediation and how a council responds to a Tribunal appeal for the two routes off this boundary.

This page is general information, not clinical or legal advice.