Search
Results [114]
  • Can the LA amend section E outcomes without consulting parents?

    We have tribunal against B, F and I in less than 2 weeks. The LA have sent in late evidence today (even though they are barred). They appear to have amended outcomes, without consultation. They also haven’t mentioned them in the email, just slipped them in.
    My child is 16 (nearly 17) and at key phase transition. Lots of the outcomes refer to the end of post 16. Does this mean if they are achieved they will try to cease to maintain at 18?

    Is it lawful to amend outcomes at this point? And without any input from parent?

    G D

    25 Oct 2024

  • Advice on how to approach LA

    Urgent advice on how to approach this please. Tribunal appeal in less than 2 weeks. LA have been awful. Not sent case review form or WD. 2 orders from Tribunal which they ignored and are currently barred.

    Today, less than 8 days before tribunal they have sent WD. Also snuck in some late evidence. And asked for a meeting with me next week to discuss what I am appealing. The appeal was lodged 5 months ago and they have not wanted to work with me at all until today.

    I have been working on WD with some help from a charity but am not sure it is quite right yet. I also don’t trust the LA now. I’m not sure whether to meet them or just say I’ll have an email discussion with them, or just do via WD?

    I’m tempted to write a timeline of when info submitted, and my emails to them and oppose them putting in late evidence. Is this worthwhile?

    G D

    24 Oct 2024

  • Section E Outcomes

    I am going to tribunal shortly for B, F and I. I know section E outcomes are not appealable per se at tribunal, but is it possible to submit them and get them updated? If not when would this happen?
    The AR is due about 3 weeks after tribunal, but I’m hoping just to roll the rulings of the tribunal over, rather than have a proper annual review and risk the LA trying to remove them!
    Thank you!

    G D

    23 Oct 2024

  • Correct route of redress.

    Section E - Outcome and Provision used to prevent full-time attendance. "Child will return to full time education by the end of Key stage one" Section F discusses slow transition but isn;t actually provision. The EHCP is under appeal with a hearing date of 13+ months now down to 12 months. The school named in Section I has placed the child on a reduced timetable. Parents disagree with this. A meeting was held, and the HT would not respond other than to state, "I am just going to repeat: we are following the EHCP". The following day, the child was suspended for 2 days. The following week, for a day. The child is in Key Stage One. We have submitted a request for change - An expedited hearing date. This is a friend I am trying to help. The EHCP is being used to prevent his legal entitlement to a full-time education. My question is, Is a PAP letter to the LA something that could work in this situation?

    M H

    19 Oct 2024

  • Is it permissable for the LA to ignore a private EP report (which they agreed to using) in the Draft EHCP? This is the only professional assesement report that has been made.

    Due to national shortages and long waiting times the LA agreed to use the Private EP report for the Draft. I have received a copy today and they have ignored all the recommondations that have been made. They made no further assessements in the assessment period.

    Harriet P
    Home

    13 Oct 2024

  • Can my son's school mark his private speech and language therapy sessions as "unauthorised" absence?

    1) My son was diagnosed postnatally with a rare neurological condition that affects fewer than one in a million children born in the UK each year. He is currently under the care of the Neurology department at Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH), where he will continue to have regular check-ups and MRI scans every six months throughout his childhood.

    2) In 2022, his condition deteriorated, and after a series of urgent and invasive interventions at GOSH, his clinical team referred him for Speech and Language Therapy (SaLT) in January 2023.

    3) We later discovered that the school (an Academy) had opted out of the NHS-provided SaLT services. Additionally, the school's SaLT, who was employed through a third-party provider, went on maternity leave, leaving the school without any SaLT cover.

    4) By July 2023, we, as his parents, felt it was crucial to privately commission SaLT services to ensure our son received the necessary support. Given the complexity of his rare condition and significant developmental delays, we decided to continue weekly private SaLT sessions alongside the therapy he receives(only started in January 2024) through his Education, Health, and Care Plan (EHCP) at school.

    5) Since 2023, when my son began attending private SaLT sessions, his school attendance for these appointments have been marked as "authorised," as they were recognised as medical appointments.

    6) However, as of this morning, we have been informed that moving forward, his attendance for these sessions will be marked as "unauthorised" and this will be reflected in his annual report.
    The school's policy defines authorised absence as:
    • When a child is absent, because of illness, and an acceptable explanation has been received
    • Religious Observance (as defined in the exemptions list)
    • Where a child has had a fixed term exclusion from school
    • Medical/dental appointments. As above, appointments should be made outside of school hours.
    wherever possible and the minimum amount of time should be taken.
    • Exceptional circumstances (unavoidable absence)
    • Any prolonged absence may trigger an unannounced home visit by the attendance/safeguarding team

    7) Our son enjoys his private SaLT sessions. We have previously inquired about alternative time slots outside of school hours, but none were available.
    The school is effectively forcing us to discontinue his private therapy, despite being the very reason we had to seek it in the first place.

    8) As I understand, in Bromley v Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal (1999), it was determined that where speech and language therapy is necessary for the child to access and benefit from education, it should be treated as an educational provision, even if the therapy is delivered by health professionals.
    At the same time under the Children and Families Act 2014, SLT is recognised as both a medical provision and an educational provision.

    Gordon M.

    20 Sep 2024

  • Fall back position - Mainstream vs Mainstream

    I am aware that I can propose a fall back position if the LA preferred school is a special school but what if it’s a mainstream?

    Can I ask for mainstream type?

    I would be using L vs Wandsworth 2006 - breakdown in relationship.

    M H

    09 Sep 2024

  • LA Consulting without informing me

    I have named a school on my child's EHCP but the local authority has consulted with a different school without my knowledge. Are they allowed to do this?

    SA FAA

    08 Sep 2024

  • Naming a school

    Can the LA name a school even if the parents and/or young person has not seen it? And can they back-class the young person for that school without parental permission? My LA claim a school have offered us a place but in the year below. We haven't seen this school or met the SENCO.

    D W

    31 Jul 2024

  • What exactly can a LA rely on when it claims to be able to refuse under "the efficient use of resources" ground of section 39 CAFA 2014?

    What exactly can a LA rely on when it claims to be able to refuse under "the efficient use of resources" ground of section 39 CAFA 2014? Whose resources? What is "efficient"? Is it as regards my child or their assessment of the use of their budget generally? Any case law on this would be welcome (ex-lawyer here, gearing up for a potential "no").

    The child is ASC, tier 4 (for risk), and has some time in a secure unit (no risk to others), Section I school is a private with annual fees close to £80k.