If a Tribunal rules for SALT provision, would LA use a private SALT already commissioned?

I am currently mid EHCP tribunal appeal over the addition of SALT and OT provision to section F. During this time, we have been privately funding a SALT ourselves who met our child and wrote a good report which became the foundation for the appeal.

Since then, there have been a couple of issues between the SALT and the school that have caused a bit of friction. We didn’t think this was too much of a problem, and just required a bit of meeting in the middle for both parties. However, the SALT has informed us that she doesn’t feel that she is a good fit and is politely withdrawing. Considering how difficult it was to get a private SALT in the first place, I’m not confident that we would be able to get another or if we even should.

Now I believe that if we win the appeal and a SALT provision is added to the EHCP, the LA would be entirely responsible for providing the specialist?

If we had a private SALT on board, would the LA take our SALT on board (which would require us to find a new one before the end of the appeal), or would they have to either provide their own (ignoring ours), or provide a personal allowance to us to cover the continuation of the privately funded SALT (if we can find a new one)?

My expected outcome is that we win the appeal, the LA then would be required to provide a SALT for the school, but the LA will not have one to provide (even if we do). They will sit on the tribunal ruling while we write letters of complaint that they are not providing the tribunal-specified support. Is there a clause or an act I should refer to when writing to the LA when this inevitably happens? What do you do when the LA just ignore the Tribunal’s ruling on the provision, to who do you go to next?

Many thanks for all your help.

T S
15 Oct 2025

0 I have this question too

Comment Follow Request an answer

0 I have this question too

Add your answer

A: SenseCheck

0 Yes
0 No
1 Other

Sort

08 Nov 2025

Other

|

Other

Can't answer yes or no.:

Dear TS

If the Tribunal decides that Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) must be included in Section F of your child’s Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP), then the Local Authority (LA) becomes legally responsible for arranging that therapy.

1. The LA’s legal duty

Under Section 42(2) of the Children and Families Act 2014, once an EHCP is in place, the LA must secure all the special educational provision written in Section F. The Noddy Guide explains that this duty rests solely with the LA — it cannot be passed to the school, the NHS, or the parents (see Noddy Guide, Section 8.24).

This means that if the Tribunal orders SALT sessions, the LA must arrange and pay for them, even if it does not currently have a therapist available (see Noddy Guide, Section 4.01).

2. Using your current private therapist

The LA can choose to use the same private therapist that you have been funding, but it does not have to. The law only requires that the therapy listed in Section F is delivered as described, not that it must be delivered by a particular therapist.

The Noddy Guide confirms that speech and language therapy is normally classed as special educational provision (SEP), so it falls fully under the LA’s duty to provide it (see Noddy Guide, Section 8.07).

If the LA uses a different therapist, that person must still hold the correct qualifications and be able to deliver the therapy to the level and frequency required by the EHCP.

3. Personal budgets and direct payments

Parents may ask the LA for a personal budget or direct payment so that they can arrange the therapy themselves. This is covered by Sections 49–50 of the Children and Families Act 2014, and explained in the Noddy Guide (see Noddy Guide, Section 6.25).

However, the LA must agree to this, and it is separate from its main duty under Section 42. The LA cannot expect you to keep paying privately or delay arranging therapy because you used to fund it yourself.

4. If the LA does not follow the Tribunal’s order

After the Tribunal decision, the LA must amend the EHCP exactly as ordered. This duty is set out in Regulation 44 of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014, and confirmed in the Noddy Guide (see Noddy Guide, Section 12.24).

If the LA fails to do this, you should write to the Director of Children’s Services and the SEN Team, reminding them of their duty under Section 42(2) of the 2014 Act and Regulation 44.

If the LA still does not act, you can complain to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO), or, in serious cases, consider judicial review for failure to meet a statutory duty (see Noddy Guide, Section 12.27).