-
Do i have to submit an annual review final EHCP to the tribunal during an appeals process?
We are currently midway through an appeals process with the LA over the addition of specialist provision to my child's EHCP. We are currently on working document version 5, and there have been numerous changes and additions to sections B & F agreed by both parties; however, the appeal continues as the LA will still not put the specialist provision into the EHCP.
The problem is we have also just had an annual review. The LA issued a draft, and then a final plan, with none of the changes currently agreed upon in the appeal. They changed a lot of section A, but otherwise, the final annual review EHCP is the same as the EHCP we are appealing from the previous year (i.e. the same as working document version 1).
Do I need to submit this new Final Annual Review EHCP to the tribunal (using the Send7 form as the IPSE website suggests), or can I just ignore it and carry on discussing the Working Document version 5 with the LA, as that is the most relevant document with all the changes agreed so far?
If the annual review final EHCP is included, it would be like taking the Working Document back to revision 1 and starting again, but I’m scared that once the appeal is finally done, they will use this new annual review final EHCP to overwrite my appealed EHCP and remove the provision I have spent a year trying to add. All the information on the internet only seems relevant if you want to add the annual review EHCP to the appeal, but in this case, I don’t. I just don’t want to give the LA another weapon against us.
Thank you for any help you can give. -
EHCP Challenges
Hello,
I've just joined the forum and would appreciate guidance on the legality of my child's situation and the best next steps to secure a suitable placement.
​Child Details:
​Age: 5 and in Year 1 (Key Stage 1) mainstream school.
​Needs: Complex ASD, significant anxiety, and acute sensory regulation needs documented by an Educational Psychologist (EP) and Occupational Therapist (OT).
​Academic: Academically able, working at or above age-related expectations (ARE) in core subjects.
AR just concluded request for specialist placement was rejected
My child's school is in another Borough.
​The Crisis: Unlawful Provision (Section 19 Breach)
​My child has been on a severely reduced, non-statutory timetable (part-time attendance) at their current mainstream school for over eight months due to their needs exceeding the school's capacity to keep them regulated and safe for a full day.
​The Local Authority (LA) recently claimed in a formal response that they were "unaware" of this reduced timetable prior to the recent Annual Review (AR).
​Crucially, this claim is refuted by their own file:
​A Multi-Agency Referral Form (MARF), referenced the crisis meeting regarding the child's "provision/timetable.", the file was sent to the LA.
​The LA-commissioned EP Report, which was distributed by the LA caseworker as part of the AR pack, explicitly documented the part-time hours.
​The LA's failure to act on this known breach for months constitutes an ongoing failure to secure full-time suitable education (a breach of Section 19 of the Education Act 1996).
​Procedural Maladministration
​A comprehensive private Occupational Therapy (OT) Report detailing essential sensory and physical adaptions was submitted to the LA for the AR.
​This OT Report was omitted from the formal evidence presented to the decision-making panel when the EHCP amendments were decided.
​Questions and Strategic Concerns
​Legal Impact: Do the documented S19 breach (ongoing reduced timetable, effectively an exclusion without process) and the clear procedural error (omission of the OT Report) provide sufficient legal grounds to successfully argue at Tribunal that the current mainstream placement is unsuitable?
​Next Steps: I have formally escalated these issues to the Head of Children's Services, demanding an urgent re-paneling and a written action plan. What further legal steps (e.g., a threat of Judicial Review, specific naming of potential placements) should I take now?
​Future Suitability Dilemma: I need to find a placement that meets two essential requirements at Key Stage 1/2:
​Therapeutic Structure: Requires a small group setting (e.g., max 10 students) with a high adult-to-child ratio (e.g., 1:5) and guaranteed, non-conditional access to low-stimulus, therapeutic spaces (Specialist Provision).
​Academic Rigour: Must provide the full Key Stage 1/2 National Curriculum and be able to differentiate provision upwards to prevent academic stagnation and ensure he reaches his full potential, rather than being limited to a foundation curriculum.
​How can I ensure the Final EHCP (specifically Sections E, F, and I) is written to legally mandate a placement that provides this therapeutic structure without forcing integration into a failed mainstream setting, yet also guarantees the necessary academic pathway?
​Thank you in advance for any insights on navigating this critical stage. -
Does a tribunal take into consideration where a parent lives? Or are decisions based on where the child lives?
I have been speaking to a parent who has 50/50 custody with her ex-husband. He lives in Camden and she lives in Hertfordshire. Her son has an EHCP with Camden who are objecting to their choice of school in Section I (in fact, in August Camden pushed the whole EHCP onto Hertfordshire Council despite knowing the Mother is about to move out of Hertfordshire).
Because the Mother has to move house (her lease comes to an end in 3 weeks) the children will live with the ex-husband full time for the next few weeks. On 12 Sept, they go to Tribunal to appeal section B, F and I. Will the Tribunal take into account the child is living in Camden at that point? Or does the Mother need to find a place in Camden before the Tribunal date? The outcome they want is for Camden to stop pushing the EHCP onto Hertfordshire and deal with it in borough.
-
When receiving an amended EHCP from the local authority (LA), must a child or young person receive a letter confirming their right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (FtT)?
When receiving an amended EHCP, is it acceptable for a local authority to send an accompanying letter with the newly issued plan, emphasising their willingness to work together to resolve any disputes but no other information? While this may be welcomed, is this what the legal framework requires?
-
If I accept the draft EHCP, can I make changes post publication if I need experts to review and provide evidence for potential FtT to get a suitable placement other than the one suggested by LA?
Can I accept the draft EHCP now as it looks ok, however if the setting in the final version is not suitable I plan to get my experts to lock down the provision update the EHCP with their findings and tell me which setting meets SEN, our preferred choice or the LAs? I am allowed to do this would without the LA arguing I had accepted the EHCP draft and cannot update it.