Do parents automatically get their choice in Section I, if a council has been "bared from taking part in any proceedings" by the Tribunal?

The Council have missed the deadline for submitting their evidence to Tribunal, and missed all subsequent deadlines. The Tribunal have responded by saying: "It is ordered: The LA is bared from taking part in any proceedings pursuant to Rule 8(2)." (however it goes on to say: "the LA may apply within 28 days of this Order, for its participation to be re-instated pursuant to Rule 8(6)".) The date of the letter is 13/08/25 + 28 days = 10/09/25. The appeal is held on 12/09/25.

The parents are going to Tribunal because they object to the school listed in Section I. Because the Council have been bared from proceedings, and if they do not respond by 10/09/25, does this mean the parents automatically get the school they requested for their child?

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.

Can an inaccurate (or out of date) Section B & E be challenged at tribunal?

Support SEND Kids has been contacted by many parents who are frustrated that their child's EHCP contains inaccuracies or includes out of date behaviours. Despite requesting the EHCP be updated at review, the school and/or local authority ignore these requests and continue to submit inaccurate EHCPs to families. At the point of phase transfer (11+/16+) these inaccuracies, in Sections B & E, have a detrimental impact on which schools will consider the child. Can a tribunal insist that a local authority revise/re-draft an EHCP?

Does anyone know what the legal position is in relation to costs in the SEND Tribunal?

Just spoken to the officer at the LGO who made the decision referred to in this question: https://supportsendkids.org/question/1681234603118

He said one of the reasons the LGO doesn't have jurisdiction is because the SEND Tribunal has the power to award costs. He said he doesn't recognise my assertion that the general rule in the SEND Tribunal is not to award costs. He said this would surprise him if it was indeed the case.

Does anyone know what the legal position is in relation to costs in the SEND Tribunal? Has the SEND Tribunal issued any guidance on this point? I was advised by our solicitors when appealing our child's EHCP that the general rule in the SEND Tribunal is that there should be no order for costs. We therefore made no such application. The officer from the LGO said he believed the SEND Tribunal did make orders for costs and that therefore the LGO couldn't look into recompense of legal fees because it would involve stepping on the toes of another body. My point is that if the other body - i.e. the SEND Tribunal - isn't using its powers and is in fact actively encouraging claimants not to - then where does that leave claimants - other than in debt if they've had to instruct a solicitor to try and obtain justice?

I asked the LGO officer if he knew what proportion of cases that came before the SEND Tribunal resulted in a costs order being made. He said he had no idea. Obviously, it his not for him to know this but I just left wondering if this information is readily available or if it's worth me making a FOI request? The officer did say there is lacuna in the law in relation the LGO's jurisdiction ending when appeal rights become available, but he assured me the LGO had fully and properly considered R (ER) v Commissioner for Local Administration & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 1407 (Hillingdon) and applied it correctly in my case. Have I reached a dead end with this or are there cases pending that might make me making an application for judical review (to be put on hold pending such a decision) worth while? Many thanks.

Are you willing to share your answers to EHCP section K? If yes, please make sure you remove personal data, such as names.

Are you willing to share your answers to EHCP section J? If yes, please make sure you remove personal data, such as names.

Are you willing to share your answers to EHCP section I? If yes, please make sure you remove personal data, such as names.

Are you willing to share your answers to EHCP section H2? If yes, please make sure you remove personal data, such as names.

Are you willing to share your answers to EHCP section G? If yes, please make sure you remove personal data, such as names.

Are you willing to share your answers to EHCP section F? If yes, please make sure you remove personal data, such as names.