What to do about 2 critical pieces of information being left off LA evidence bundle
I am going to tribunal imminently and I have just realised that two vital pieces of information for my evidence are not in the LA's prepared bundle. I was so overwhelmed with the pages of irrelevant material that was put in (by them e.g some historical notes not particularly relevant) that I missed what was critical and I have just seen it. A send7 will delay my case and I cannot do this, (even though I intend to but I basically cannot wait for the response) my child is not in education so I cannot delay the hearing (even though the LA appear to be doing all they can to delay it). It rests on section I .....what can I do I am really worried the judge and panel will not see these vital pieces of evidence. I did submit them previously but they are not in the bundle and I assume this is what the judge and panel sees? as in not what has previously been submitted but what has been collated and is in the bundle? I do feel this was a tactical move and sadly intentional any advice appreciated thank you
A: SenseCheck
- 0 Yes
- 0 No
- 1 Other
- 01 Oct 2026
-
Other
|
Simple
Can't answer yes or no.:
If the two documents were submitted by the final evidence deadline, this would appear to be a bundle omission rather than late evidence.
You may wish to email the Tribunal and the LA straight away, attaching the two documents again and explaining when they were originally submitted. It may also be helpful to say that, on reviewing the LA’s bundle, you noticed that they had been omitted. If you have the Tribunal’s acknowledgement confirming receipt when they were first sent, I would attach that too.
You could ask for the documents to be added to the bundle or, if necessary, a supplementary bundle, while making clear that you are not seeking an adjournment and want the hearing to proceed as listed.
If the issue has not been resolved by the hearing, you could raise it with the judge at the outset and have copies available.
I would be cautious about suggesting that the omission was deliberate unless there is clear evidence for that.
01 Oct 2026
|
2 Comments