We have EOTAS following tribunal, with provision specified in section F. It is now five weeks since we received the tribunal order and the provision ...

... is not in place - ie we haven't received the personal budget. We have received a pb contract, but it doesn't include all the provision in section F. Some of which is really clear (eg 38 weeks instead of 39) and some I think the LA would consider open to interpretation, though seems pretty clear to me. I don't want to sign a contract that isn't correct, but I do need the money ASAP to pay the providers. Is my best option just an official complaint? Is there any wording to quote to potentially speed things up? Thank you

Do I need to take a solicitor with me to the EHCP interim review?

Is there any case law about keeping a child on school roll where EOTAS is agreed ? The schools guide indicates that there is an expectation that the ...

... school maintains contact and keeps the child on roll but is there any law making this mandatory?

Can Section A only be amended at annual review? I have just successfully appealed Sections B, F and I of my child’s EHCP at Tribunal. The Tribunal ...

... has ordered the LA to amend Sections B and F. The LA is in the process of doing so. My question is whether the LA is precluded in law from making the amendments I have requested to Section A at the same time?

The LA has said it can only do what the Tribunal has ordered it do it and that I will have to wait a year for an annual review to ask for amendments to Section A. My understanding is that as Section A can’t be appealed and does not come within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, there is nothing in law to preclude the LA from making amendments to Section A now - when they are working on the EHCP to amend Sections B and F. Is this right?

I know I may be wasting my time arguing a point of principle here, but it feels an important one as the Draft EHCP was very poorly drafted and didn’t even include the full views my daughter had written out herself nor the full information she had given to the LA’s Ed Psych as part of a sentence completion activity. I therefore felt that in not including them in Section A her voice had been ignored, which was contrary to the whole principle of the Code of Practice. I have been asking for these amendments since the poorly written Draft was issued.

The LA ignored my requests to make the amendments during the exchange of working documents and has now come back with a ‘No’ and an email saying, ‘This can be amended following a future annual review. Legally [we] must stick to the working document and what the Tribunal have ordered us to amend.’ This feels unnecessarily unreasonable but is there anything in law to support their point?

Any advice gratefully received. Thank you.

LA has agreed to EOTAS (involving tutoring, educational provision at an equestrian centre, and clinical psychology support). I have asked for ...

... transport costs - my car mileage - in taking my 13 year old child to and from these places. She has severe SEMH needs and will not allow anyone else to transport her. Is there law to support me claiming my car mileage; and can this be written into her EHCP? Many thanks.

My daughter is in mainstream with an EHCP of 32.5. I want her moved into a primary specialist setting. She’s now yr 5. Process was delayed by 2 ...

... years due to pandemic. Have been turned down. LA also in email trying to deter me from naming a specialist secondary on her AR which is next week. Despite EP has stated ‘she needs a differentiated curriculum’ and to be ‘educated with like-minded peers’ . And that info appearing on EHCP draft.

The reasons LA gave were vague and non specific. School is full, levels too high apparently , (even though only emerging y3 with full support) and would impact on efficient education of others. (Found case law on IPSEA)
Current School support the move.
Feel that LA acting unlawfully and incompetent re timelines.. so was told I could go to AR with only a working document not a proper draft - I’ve challenged that and working doc has been relabelled and sent as a draft with now obsolete info as per EP report.

I will exercise my daughter’s right of appeal, but is it only learning levels that are ever considered at tribunals? she has a complex range of medical, soc communication and physical disabilities as well as being at pre key stage levels.

Is there anything in the Noddy Guide specific to this?

Also can I name out of county as an alternative?
Thanks

I have become aware of potential discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 following a subject access review about failure to make reasonable ...

... adjustments. Some of the activity is beyond 6 months but I have only become aware of the activity recently as a result of the subject access review (under 6 months). If I were to make a claim under the Equality Act would these activities be admissible since I only was made aware of them recently and, more importantly, now have sufficient evidence? I do have a recent example within six months that I can use. Is my understanding correct that I can bring in older evidence to show a pattern? Any potential claim would be made in the context for a child with an EHCP to the SEND Tribunal. Thank you.

I am currently supporting a LA, piloting universal banded funding across Mainstream and Special Schools EHCP pupils. From feedback received from ...

... participating schools, we are considering revising the format of the EHCP documentation.

We would like to some clarity on the following proposals:
• Are there any legal implications for adding ‘Primary’ and ‘Secondary Need’ type into the front page of an EHCP?
• Are there any legal implications for adding the agreed ‘Banding Level’ into the front page of an EHCP?
• Alternative to the above, would there be any legal implications for adding ‘Banded Funding’ (and then listing the allocated banding, e.g. “Banded funding: SEMH – band 2”) onto the front page of an EHCP?
I hope this makes sense and am grateful for any advice on this.

My friend is planning to move to Hertfordshire with her 15 year old son who has complex needs. She has identified an appropriate college for him but ...

... is hesitating because that college is telling her that she won't get funding from Hertfordshire beyond the age of 19. They referred her to this web page to explain the local authority's policy on funding for children with EHCPs. As far as I can see there is nothing on the website suggesting that he won't be eligible for funding, and in any case surely he is legally entitled to funding until the age of 25 no matter where he lives? https://www.hertfordshire.gov.uk/microsites/local-offer/preparing-for-adulthood/further-education.aspx

I am applying for changes to my child's EHCP in respect of her 1:1 provision. Does anyone have a good example of wording for Part F of the EHCP for ...

... full time 1:1?