Legal Question

22 April 2026

Jade and Rohan are parents of Deaf twins, a girl and a boy, who attend their local mainstream school.

“As parents, we have always respected the school attendance policy and taken it seriously. Every year we receive reminders that taking our children out of school during term time whether for medical appointments, family commitments, or a short break could result in a fine. The rules are strict, the consequences are clear, and the responsibility sits firmly on our shoulders.

What we do not understand is why this same level of accountability disappears when the responsibility shifts to the local authority.

Both our twins have EHCPs which sets out the support they must receive. In practice, it often feels optional, at least for the local authority. After months of delays, missed deadlines, and unfulfilled provision, our twins fell further behind academically, socially and emotionally.

Knowing that schools can fine parents for taking children out of school during term time, why is there no comparable accountability or financial redress when local authorities fail to meet their legal duties for SEN provision?

In other words, if parents can like us be fined for breaching attendance rules, why can’t we be compensated when statutory failings in the SEN system cause real financial loss, emotional distress, and disruption to their children’s education?”

Answer

When the system fails: accountability for local authorities in SEN provision

For many families, the law can feel unbalanced. Parents such as Jade and Rohan, whose Deaf twins have Education, Health and Care Plans and attend a mainstream school, are aware, and reminded, that school attendance is a legal requirement. Taking a child out of school during term time without authorisation can result in a fine. The expectations are clear and the consequences are immediate.

Yet when a local authority fails to deliver the support set out in an Education, Health and Care Plan, the response can appear far less direct.

Under section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014, a local authority has an absolute legal duty to secure the special educational provision specified in a child’s EHCP. This duty is not optional, and it cannot be delegated to a school. If therapies, specialist teaching, communication support, or other provision are written into the plan, the authority must ensure they are delivered.

When that does not happen, the impact on a child can be significant. Missed provision can lead to academic delay, social isolation, emotional distress, and in some cases regression in skills. Families may feel compelled to fund private tuition or therapy to prevent their child from falling further behind.

So why is there no equivalent “fine” when a local authority fails to meet its duties?

The answer lies in the way public law operates. There is no automatic financial penalty imposed on local authorities for breaches of EHCP duties. Instead, parents must take active steps to challenge the failure.

The first step is usually the local authority’s complaints process. If the issue is not resolved, parents can complain to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman. The Ombudsman can investigate where a council has delayed, acted unfairly, or failed to follow the law. If fault is found, they can recommend a financial payment. This is not a fine to punish the council, but a way of recognising the distress caused and the loss of educational provision.

In urgent or serious cases, parents may consider judicial review. This is a legal process in the High Court which can compel a local authority to comply with its statutory duties. Judicial review focuses on ensuring that the authority acts lawfully and fulfils its obligations. It is not primarily a route to compensation, but it can be effective in forcing action where provision has stalled.

Civil claims for damages are possible in limited circumstances, particularly where a clear duty of care can be established and demonstrable harm has resulted. These cases are complex and fact specific, and they are not the most common route to redress in SEND disputes.

The contrast with school attendance enforcement is clear. Parents face a fixed penalty system with defined and immediate consequences. By comparison, when a local authority fails to meet its legal duties, families must identify the breach, gather evidence, and pursue formal challenge themselves. It is this imbalance that understandably fuels frustration.

Despite pressures on local authority budgets, the legal duty to secure EHCP provision remains binding. Financial constraints do not remove statutory responsibility.

For parents in this position, detailed record keeping is vital. Keep copies of the EHCP, correspondence, reports, and evidence of missed provision. Document the impact on your child. Early legal advice or independent advocacy can also make a significant difference.

There may not be an automatic fine system for local authorities, but there are mechanisms to hold them to account. Understanding those routes is often the first step in ensuring that children receive the support to which they are legally entitled.