Complaints and SEND Tribunal appeals
Families can appeal to the SEND Tribunal against many council decisions, such as refusing to assess, refusing to issue a plan, what a plan says, or the school it names.
Tribunal appeals
In 2025, 62 appeals about Waltham Forest decisions were registered with the SEND Tribunal (58 in 2024). That is an appeal rate of 3.7%, compared with 6.6% across England. Appeals are counted against all the decisions families could have appealed.
SEND Tribunal appeal rate
Appeals registered with the SEND Tribunal as a share of all decisions that could be appealed, such as refusals to assess, plans issued or not, annual review outcomes and plans ceased. Calendar years.
Waltham ForestEngland
London boroughs, 2025
- 1Enfield
- 2Merton
- 3Richmond upon Thames
- 4Tower Hamlets
- 5Lambeth
- 6Bexley
- 7Harrow
- 8Waltham Forest
- 9Brent
- 10Hammersmith and Fulham
- 11Croydon
- 12Ealing
- 13Barking and Dagenham
- 14Sutton
- 15Hackney
- 16Wandsworth
- 17Redbridge
- 18Barnet
- 19Havering
- 20Westminster
- 21Southwark
- 22Newham
- 23Kingston upon Thames
- 24Islington
- 25Kensington and Chelsea
- 26Haringey
- 27Hounslow
- 28Hillingdon
- 29Bromley
- 30Camden
- 31Greenwich
Compare with similar areas, 2025
Waltham Forest is 2nd of 10 with its similar areas (1st = lowest). How similar areas are chosen.
- 1Harrow
- 2Waltham Forest
- 3Croydon
- 4Ealing
- 5Redbridge
- 6Barnet
- 7Southampton
- 8Haringey
- 9Hounslow
- 10Hillingdon
Show the numbers
| Area | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Waltham Forest | – | 3.7% |
| England | 6.1% | 6.6% |
DfE did not publish a 2024 appeal rate for Waltham Forest; the figure is suppressed in its table. The notes to DfE's table explain how appealable decisions are counted, including a 2025 change to use annual reviews completed. A low appeal rate is not on its own evidence that families are satisfied.
Source: DfE, Education, health and care plans: SEND Tribunals and appeal rate 2024-2025 (downloaded 2026-10-25)
The council's own count of appeals
| Item | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Appeals | 18 | 16 | 36 | 34 | 63 |
Source: London Borough of Waltham Forest, SEND Sufficiency Plan 2025-30 (in the Schools Forum pack, 10 December 2025) (December 2025), p. 27. In 2024, 27% of appeals were about refusals to assess, 25% about the school or type of placement and 21% about plan contents. Mediation referrals rose from 77 in 2022-23 to 145 in 2023-24 (page 26). The council's legal costs for tribunal cases were £48,860 in 2024, up from £26,197 in 2023, excluding counsel fees.
Complaints to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman
Families who are unhappy with how the council handled a complaint can go to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman can look at delays and failures to deliver what a plan says. It usually won't look at decisions that can be appealed to the SEND Tribunal.
Published Ombudsman decisions about SEND in Waltham Forest
Decisions the Ombudsman has published in its "special educational needs" category, by reporting year (April to March). "Upheld" means the Ombudsman found fault, including cases where the council had already accepted fault and offered a remedy.
| Year | SEND decisions published | Upheld | Not upheld | Closed without investigating | All published decisions about the council |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021/22 incomplete: older decisions deleted | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 35 |
| 2022/23 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 68 |
| 2023/24 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 89 |
| 2024/25 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 89 |
| 2025/26 | 10 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 109 |
| 2026/27 year to date | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 58 |
The Ombudsman does not publish every decision and deletes decision statements after five years, so these are minimum counts. Its headline statistics are not split by service, so the SEND figures come from the category on each published decision.
Source: Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, published decisions (downloaded 2026-10-25). Download all decisions (CSV)
The SEND decisions
Show all 27 decision summaries
| Date | Outcome | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-24 | Closed after initial enquiries | We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a child’s Education, Health and Care plan. This is because the complainant has used her right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) and the Courts have decided that the Ombudsman cannot intervene where the right to appeal has been used. We will not investigate part of the complaint because it is late and there are no good reasons to investigate it now. Read the decision (25 022 274) |
| 2026-04-29 | Not upheld | We will not investigate this complaint because we already considered the matters Ms X complained about in another investigation. Read the decision (25 013 028) |
| 2026-04-26 | Closed after initial enquiries | We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council failed to secure a school placement for her child. This is because it was reasonable for Mrs X to have used her right of appeal to a tribunal. Read the decision (25 018 814) |
| 2026-04-12 | Upheld | We found fault on Mrs Y’s complaint about the Council failing to ensure her son, Z, received provision set out in the Education, Health and Care plan. There was a repeated failure to ensure Z received the provision from two schools, provide the correct level of funding, along with a failure to meet statutory timescales for the annual review process. The Council agreed to send an apology for the failings, pay a symbolic payment for the injustice caused, as well as a payment towards private tuition costs. It would carry out a review to ensure no future repetition of the failures found. Read the decision (25 002 671) |
| 2026-03-10 | Upheld | We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in issuing an Education, Health and Care Plan for Ms X’s child. The Council has agreed to provide a proportionate remedy for the distress caused and this removes the need for us to investigate. Read the decision (25 014 819) |
| 2026-02-25 | Upheld | The Council failed to ensure Miss X’s child, Y received an education in line with their Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan between December 2024 and July 2025 when they could not attend school due to exclusion. The Council was also at fault for significant delays in issuing Y’s amended EHC Plan following an annual review in July 2024. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to recognise the injustice this caused. Read the decision (25 006 832) |
| 2026-02-18 | Upheld | We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Council’s Educational, Health and Care annual review process. The Council has provided an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused to the complainant and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. Read the decision (25 013 782) |
| 2026-02-13 | Closed after initial enquiries | We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to ensure the complainant had access to appropriate education. This is because his representative used her right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) on his behalf, and the matters about which he complains are bound up with those which were the subject of the appeal. Read the decision (25 010 929) |
| 2026-01-02 | Upheld | We upheld a complaint made by Ms J, about the education provision made for her son, Mr K, who had an Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council failed to respond to her concerns over several months including after she complained. We found this caused injustice to both Ms J and Mr K as distress. We also found Mr K lost some education provision. The Council accepted our findings. At the end of this statement, we set out what action it agreed to take to remedy Mr K’s and Ms J’s injustice and improve its service to prevent a repeat of the fault. Read the decision (24 011 106) |
| 2025-10-21 | Upheld | We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions relating to an Education, Health, and Care Plan. Parts of the complaint are late, and other parts had an alternative legal remedy. Nor will we investigate the delays in completing an annual review, because the Council has agreed to a suitable remedy for Miss X’s injustice. There are no wider public interest issues to justify investigating this complaint. Read the decision (24 021 596) |
| 2025-09-28 | Upheld | Mr A complained on behalf of Mr B about the Council’s decision to cease Mr B’s Education, Health and Care Plan in 2020 and failure to support him to get back into education since then. We found the Council was at fault for the delay in the Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment process from March 2024 and records keeping around its decision for additional funding for Mr B’s social care support. The Council agreed to our recommendations on what to do to remedy the injustice its faults caused to Mr B. Read the decision (24 016 161) |
| 2025-07-20 | Upheld | The Council was at fault as it failed to issue Mr X’s child’s amended Education, Health and Care Plan within statutory timescales following their annual reviews, and its communication with him and handling of his complaint was poor. The Council was not at fault for failing to disclose information about support services and appeal rights. It will apologise to Mr X and pay him £250 to recognise the avoidable frustration and uncertainty caused by its faults. Read the decision (24 019 461) |
| 2025-06-15 | Upheld | Mr X complained the Council delayed in updating his son’s Education, Health and Care Plan following an annual review. Mr X also complains his son did not receive support at school and relevant assessments have not been completed. We find the Council at fault for a delay in issuing an amended, final Education, Health and Care Plan. This caused Mr X distress, frustration and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay Mr X a symbolic payment to remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified. Read the decision (24 013 783) |
| 2025-05-15 | Upheld | Mr X complained the Council failed to ensure his son, Y received an education or the specialist provision in his Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan since October 2023 while he was out of school. The Council was at fault as it failed to ensure Y received a suitable education in line with his EHC Plan between October 2023 and July 2024. The Council agreed to make payments to recognise the impact this had on Y’s education and for the distress and uncertainty caused to Mr X. Read the decision (24 009 945) |
| 2024-12-06 | Upheld | Ms X complained the Council named a mainstream school on her son, Y’s, Education, Health and Care Plan and ignored her request for a special school. Ms X also complained the Council’s communication with her was very poor and it delayed responding to her complaint. We found the Council delayed consulting a special school for three months and responding to Ms X’s complaint. The Council will apologise to Ms X and pay her a symbolic amount of £300 to recognise the frustration this caused her. Read the decision (23 005 996) |
| 2024-11-26 | Upheld | Ms X complained the Council delayed completing her child’s phased transfer annual review process. As a result, Ms X’s appeal rights were delayed and she could not challenge her child’s secondary school placement until several months after she should have been able to. We found the Council at fault for delaying consulting with schools and producing a final Education, Health and Care Plan for the child’s phased transfer to secondary school. We also found the Council at fault for not issuing an amended Education, Health and Care Plan after an annual review in 2023. To remedy the injustice caused the Council agreed to apologise to Ms X, make a payment to her to recognise the avoidable distress and uncertainty and carry out a service improvement. Read the decision (24 002 861) |
| 2024-10-24 | Upheld | There was a delay actioning Ms X’s request for a school place for Y. There was a failure to consider carrying out an early annual review of Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan and a delay in issuing a final amended Plan. Communication was poor. This caused avoidable frustration and distress and delayed Y’s transition back to education in a school. The Council will apologise, make symbolic payments, issue an amended Plan and ensure arrangements are in place for Y to start school. Read the decision (24 004 046) |
| 2024-05-20 | Closed after initial enquiries | We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of an Education Health and Care Plan. This is because the matter is being considered at a Tribunal. Read the decision (24 002 284) |
| 2024-04-22 | Upheld | Ms X complained the Council failed to take sufficient action to ensure her child, Z, who has an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan, received suitable education after they were permanently excluded from school. She says this meant Z was out of education for longer than needed. The law prevents us investigating most of these events, as they occurred too long ago or because Ms X had a right of appeal to the tribunal, and it was reasonable for her to have used it. However we found the Council did fail to arrange some special educational needs provision for Z for ten term-time months and this matter was not linked to the issues Ms X could have appealed to the tribunal. It also significantly delayed responding to Ms X’s complaint. In recognition of the injustice caused to Z and Ms X, the Council has agreed to apologise, pay Ms X £2,150 and carry out service improvements. Read the decision (23 005 698) |
| 2024-04-10 | Closed after initial enquiries | We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide an Education, Health and Care plan. This is because Mrs X had a right of appeal to the SEND tribunal that she has either used or could reasonably have used. Read the decision (23 019 274) |
| 2024-03-27 | Closed after initial enquiries | We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has declined to consult the schools of the complainant’s choice when considering which placement to name in her child’s Education Health and Care Plan. This is because it would be reasonable for the complainant to use her right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability). Read the decision (23 018 488) |
| 2023-06-12 | Upheld | Mrs X complained the Council refused to increase her son, F’s personal budget to secure funding for a teaching assistant in line with his Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan. F’s personal budget was underfunded which means the Council did not provide all of the teaching assistant hours which F was entitled to in line with his EHC plan. The Council agreed to increase F’s personal budget to cover the extra 13 hours F is entitled to and backdate the missing payments. It also agreed to pay Mrs X £300 to acknowledge the distress, inconvenience and time and trouble the matter caused her and carry out service improvements. Read the decision (22 011 395) |
| 2023-05-21 | Upheld | The Council delayed issuing a final Education, Health and Care plan when Mrs B’s son, M, was in his last year of primary school. If there had been no delay, M would have started senior school around 6 months earlier, and the Council would not have taken action against Mr and Mrs B for not sending M to a school which it later conceded was not suitable for his needs. The Council has agreed to apologise and make payments for the loss of education and distress. It has also agreed to make service improvements. Read the decision (22 013 245) |
| 2023-05-03 | Upheld | Ms D complained the Council mishandled her daughter’s transition to a college placement. She also says its communication with her was poor and it delayed updating her daughter’s Education, Health and Care plan. We find the Council was at fault as it failed to adhere to statutory timescales when handling Ms D’s daughter’s transition to college. It also delayed updating the Education, Health and Care plan and it failed to provide interim educational provision. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault. Read the decision (22 010 783) |
| 2023-04-10 | Upheld | The Council failed to provide Mrs B’s son with suitable education when he was unable to attend school. It also failed to make proper and timely efforts to identify a school which could meet his needs. We have recommended that the Council apologises and makes payments for the loss of education, distress and avoidable time and trouble. We have also recommended service improvements. Read the decision (22 010 136) |
| 2021-12-15 | Closed after initial enquiries | We will not investigate this complaint against the Council regarding an Education and Health Care Plan (EHCP) which was not completed within the relevant time scale. This is because the Council acknowledged fault during its complaints process and there is nothing that we could add to its investigation. The complainant can now further amend the EHCP if she wishes, and if her further amendments are not agreed by the Council, she has the right to go to the Special Needs and Disability (SEND) Tribunal. Read the decision (21 010 446) |
| 2021-10-27 | Upheld | The Council was at fault when it failed to find a suitable school placement for Mr X’s son, S, who has an Education, Health and Care Plan. It also failed to provide S with suitable alternative education and communicated poorly with Mr X. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, pay him £4,500 to remedy the injustice to both him and his son, and make service improvements. Read the decision (21 001 977) |
All council services, compared with similar councils
| Year | Complaints investigated | Upheld | Upheld rate | Similar councils | Upheld per 100,000 residents | Similar councils |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018/19 | 35 | 24 | 69% | 63% | – | – |
| 2019/20 | 29 | 20 | 69% | 70% | – | – |
| 2020/21 | 29 | 22 | 76% | 72% | – | – |
| 2021/22 | 22 | 14 | 64% | 71% | – | – |
| 2022/23 | 27 | 21 | 78% | 77% | 7.6 | 8.3 |
| 2023/24 | 26 | 25 | 96% | 85% | 9.1 | 8.2 |
| 2024/25 | 30 | 21 | 70% | 84% | 7.6 | 9.1 |
| 2025/26 | 51 | 45 | 88% | 88% | 16.1 | 10.2 |
These cover every council service (housing, social care, parking and so on), not just SEND. "Similar councils" is the Ombudsman's average for London boroughs.
Source: Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, Waltham Forest complaint statistics (downloaded 2026-10-25)
Complaints to the council
The improvement plan's measure is simply "fewer complaints received".
Published target: none.