-
EHCP was issued with no school named. Initially mainstream but now agreed mainstream is not appropriate. The LA have consulted for a school place with incorrect diagnosis, stating that my daughter has MLD social and behavioural needs when she is SpLD, intelligent and has no social or behavioural needs. Are they breaking the law in doing this?
-
Can the LA impose their own policy on consulting schools?
We have a "transition review" coming up (child in year 6) and also a contents tribunal a few weeks after that. Perhaps because of the latter, the LA are being particularly hostile and obstructive towards us.
We want them to consult with a non-section 41 school which we belive meets our child's needs. The school has indicated they'd be happy to receive evidence from us e.g. Tribunal Working Document, reports from experts (e.g. OT and EdPsych) which give a fuller picture than the current EHCP, but they want the LA to consult.
We have good reason to think they will object and try to obstruct on various grounds (which they've used recently with others)
- Refusing to consult one school before consulting others (Catch 22 for us as it's non Section 41 and we need to know whether they'll offer a place before we can name it)
- They have an internal policy that they insist on naming at least two or three schools and that one of these must be mainstream. This to me sounds like a blanket policy they've imposed locally and not law. Can I challenge it?
- Can they refuse to disclose accurate information to any other schools they consult (e.g. their own schools), if we disclose that they share it - e.g. working document, expert reports etc.?
thank you
OJ