Ombudsman Slams County Council Over Lack of Treatment For Disabled Boy

Published on: 30 Mar, 2019
Updated on: 1 Apr, 2019

By Rebecca Curley local democracy reporter and The Guildford Dragon NEWS

Surrey County Council has been criticised for taking too long to issue an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) for a disabled boy with complex needs, and ordered to pay the family £3,750.

An investigation by Michael King, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, found the boy spent 15 months in a school unable to provide the right therapy, waiting for the plan to be issued. He is now in a school that can provide for his needs.

Cllr Julie Iles

Cllr Julie Iles, lead member for all-age learning, says the council has fully accepted the findings and is apologising to the family as well as providing extra training for staff.

Mr King’s report, published on Wednesday, March 27, said the council’s long delay in issuing the EHCP meant the boy, with significant Special Educational Needs (SEN), spent too long in a school unable to provide the right occupational therapy support.

The investigation found the father’s communication with the council was restricted without good reason and found the council at fault for claiming it did not know about the boy’s missing therapy sessions for more than a year after the father first informed them.

Mr King said: “We have issued a national report on councils’ handling of EHC Plans, and numerous reports since of individual councils getting things wrong in this area. I urge councils to take note of the advice and recommendations they contain.

“This case was beset with misinformation and poor communication from the council with the family. On a number of occasions, we asked officers to back up their assertions about what the father had agreed, and its reasoning behind certain decisions. The council provided us with little or no evidence.

“This is unfortunately the second time we have upheld a complaint from this family about the council’s poor communication. I welcome its ready acceptance of my recommendations, and hope the council will now learn the lessons about keeping people properly informed.”

The ombudsman’s role is to remedy injustice and share learning from investigations to help improve public, and adult social care, services.

The ombudsman said the “injustice” had caused the boy’s family “justified frustration, anger and avoidable uncertainty”.

The council had also delayed carrying out an assessment of whether the failings had “set back” the boy’s progress.

“It was important to do this promptly so any remedial action could follow soon, minimising any effect on [the boy’s] progress,” the ombudsman said.

The report concluded the council’s failure to “honour its commitments is a significant fault”.

Michael King, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said: “Members of the public can only have trust in their local authorities if they deliver what they promise. Surrey County Council did not do this.”

Councillor Chris Botten, leader of Surrey County Council Liberal Democrats, said: “That this new action on the ombudsman’s part was necessary is shameful and embarrassing.”

SCC said it accepts the findings and was “very sorry to this young boy and his family”.

In this case, the council has agreed to apologise to the father for the delay in issuing the EHCP, wrongly telling him it was unaware of missing occupational therapy sessions, and seeking to restrict his communication without good reason.

The council must also pay the father £3,000 for his son’s lost school provision and a further £250 for his time and trouble in having to pursue the matter, as well as £500 for the frustration caused by restricting his communications.

The council has agreed to arrange training for its SEN staff to ensure they are aware that attending a specialist school does not automatically meet a child’s special educational needs when the EHCP is out of date, and that they should not restrict a person’s communications without evidence.

Cllr Iles said: “We fully accept the findings from the ombudsman and we are apologising to the family. This young boy is now receiving the right support to meet his complex needs and we’ll ensure that continues and also act on the recommendations made, including providing extra staff training.

“We’ve already made changes to services since this happened and we’re carrying out a wider transformation which is aimed at giving children and young people the support they need at the earliest opportunity, in line with our vision for Surrey that no one is left behind.”

Since 2014, the number of EHCPs issued in Surrey has increased by more than 60%, to more than 8,000.