(UK) Harrow: Council fails to educate disabled young man; mom has to quit work

 Nov 22, 2025, My London: North London mum 'had to give up work to tutor special needs son due to council failings' 

The Harrow mum claimed he wasn't getting the core education he was supposed to have as outlined in his EHCP

https://www.mylondon.news/news/north-london-news/north-london-mum-had-give-32919126.amp

A North London mum said she had to give up work to tutor her son, who has special needs, as he was not getting a proper education in line with his education, health, and care plan (EHCP), according to an Ombudsman report.

The mum - referred to in the report as Miss C - complained that Harrow Council didn't carry out an annual review of her son's EHCP on time and the local authority did not ensure that he was receiving an education in line with the plan.

Miss C claimed that her son - referred to in the report as B - was only receiving the therapy set out in the plan but "no meaningful core education", meaning he had only basic literacy skills, according to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO).

B has learning and development difficulties and is subject to an EHCP, which underwent an annual review in July 2023. Following this, Miss C complained to the council that she was not satisfied with the education he was receiving at his provider. The local authority acknowledged this and advised that it would hold another review in September.

The LGSCO investigation found that, as the council ultimately decided to issue an amended EHCP, it should have done so within 12 weeks of the review - giving a deadline of December 2023. However, when Miss C complained to the Ombudsman in January 2025 it remained outstanding, meaning the council "never actually completed the September 2023 review".

Given the length of time involved, the Ombudsman considered this failure as representing "a significant injustice" to Miss C. However, considering the limited engagement B was having with his provider at the time, the Ombudsman was unable "to point to any precise substantive impact this had" so considered any injustice that may have arisen because of this as "uncertain".

Whilst Miss C said she had to give up work to provide B with tuition and supervision that she felt he was not getting, the LGO report states that it is not the Ombudsman's role to determine "the suitability of educational provision". Rather, its role is to assess whether the council was at fault for any of its decision making. . . .

"The council's role here was to satisfy itself, in the general sense, that the package the provider had arranged was adequate for B."

The LGSCO did find additional fault with the council regarding how it handled Miss C's complaint. She was still not satisfied with the council's response after stage 2 and, in October 2024, wanted to escalate it further - which should have meant she was advised to contact the Ombudsman.

The report states: "However, for reasons which are unclear, the council then confirmed it had accepted the complaint at stage 3, and gave Miss C a deadline for response. And it was only in December, after Miss C had chased the council for a response, that it corrected its error, and told her she must now approach the Ombudsman if she wished to pursue her complaint further.

"Given Miss C approached us within the space of a few weeks after receiving this message, I consider it reasonable to assume she would have done so in a similar period, had the council advised her to do so in September. This means Miss C's complaint to the Ombudsman was unnecessarily delayed by approximately three months, which again is an injustice to her."

Following the investigation, the LGSCO determined that the council should apologise and offer to pay Miss C £500 [$653]"to reflect the uncertainty and frustration" caused by its faults in the case. Harrow Council was approached for comment but did not respond ahead of publication.