Here some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on SN.

LGO news of sorts: Ed Psych anyone?

(79 Posts)
inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 17:41:34

LGO will now deal with my request for a case review. God, why be so difficult.

As part of my complaint, I complained about some pretty scurrilous emails which were being circulated about me during Tribunal. They were not disclosed by the LA to my lawyers when requested but were voluntarily sent to the LGO which is how I got them.

One in particular is awful. It says the sender has spoken to school and accuses me of harrassing school, says staff were planning to leave because of me, that children on SA and SA+ weren't getting provision because of my unreasonable demands.

It is also very disparaging against DS. Saying he thinks he can do as he wants, even saying he marches in to the staffroom to demand that he doesn't do PE etc. It ridicules his 'anxiety' which it places in quotes like that. It says he lies and tells his parents he hasn't been doing work on targets when he has.

Utter, utter, contemptible bollocks.

LGO redacted email address info even though they were LA email addresses.

So requested info from LA. They sent same the email with just the sender's email redacted. At least it showed it was circulated to 7 other LA staff, 4 of whom I had never heard of.

I pressed the issue and asked them to reveal who had sent this pernicious email and they tried to rely on a third party exemption. I asked outright whether this person worked for the LA.

So this afternoon, I get told who it was.

An educational psychologist. Visiting school on another matter. This EP saw my son once ten months previously and had not seen him again. Yet she reports back everything the school has said as fact and her vitriol is amazing. She talks about using the email for Tribunal and doing something about me. She then circulates this to numerous colleagues.

The level gets lower and lower. This woman has no first had experience of my son or what was going on at school or his targets and whether they were being done but she writes this crap.

Surely this is unethical??

TOWIELA Fri 26-Jul-13 18:03:32

Shocking! Do EPs have a professional body?

Is there anything slanderous or libellous in the email?

With the deliberate original non-disclosure of the email - I was talking to a DPA lawyer today who told me that deliberate non-disclosure is a criminal offence under the Act.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 18:06:34

Yes. All the comments detailed above are defamatory as a matter of law. EPs do have a professional body.

But wouldn't you like the LA just once to say, yes, we could have dealt with that better and this is not appropriate.

They've consistently failed to explain non-disclosure and ICO just didn't address it at all. Literally, it listed 4 DPA/FOIA requests and said all had been complied with. It just ignored the one that was the actual subject of the complaint!

babiki Fri 26-Jul-13 18:07:49

Omg for once I have no words.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 18:29:52

Should add that on the day this email was sent, I later found out that the head, the LA and SLT had got together to stitch up their evidence for Tribunal

Coincidence?? hmm

TOWIELA Fri 26-Jul-13 18:44:31

It would be lovely for a LA to apologise. But I've learnt to expect nothing but crap from them. Why aren't these people accountable!!!!

And I really don't see why the ICO doesn't throw the book at all the illegal DPA stuff that goes on around SEN children. The most vulnerable of our society are not being protected by the law and it is so wrong!

Strongecoffeeismydrug Fri 26-Jul-13 18:50:44

I'd be like lie about me and I will be pissed off but lie about my child And you will pay for it.
People should be brought to task over such slander

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 18:52:20

I know. They are useless beyond measure.

it couldn't be clearer that they failed to disclose so just ignore it as there is no answer to it. We are challenging this with the PHSO as you can complain about the ICO to the PHSO!

This nasty email was sent to 7 people but never responded to apparently. Yet, within an hour the head of SEN forwards it to the complaints dept and says can we use this together with the LGOs ruling to call her vexatious?

Complaints dept then respond.

I think this EP was just used as a way of setting out the complaint.

TOWIELA Fri 26-Jul-13 18:57:37

oh god - it just goes on and on! When my nightmare is finally over (which ever way the Tribunal has gone), I will be complaining too but your story fills me with despair!

Yes, they've probably just used the EP as an excuse, but even so, I'd have her job for this - or at the very least a disciplinary action for being unethical and unprofessional.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 19:06:42

Bloody LGO - if they'd found maladministration, LA wouldn't have dared do this But LGO waited another year to conclude there had been some maladminstration.

Bloody EP - I will investigate the professional ethics side of it. Can't see they will be any better than ICO, LGO etc etc

ouryve Fri 26-Jul-13 19:26:25

That takes the biscuit. I know work is hard to find, but what EP (or any other professional) could work in an environment where this behaviour is quite clearly expected of them, then go home and sleep at night?

Saying he thinks he can do as he wants, even saying he marches in to the staffroom to demand that he doesn't do PE etc

They've got the wrong boy. It's DS1 who does that! Funnily, no one gets huffy about it. They deal with it as gently as possible, taking the attitude that he has a problem rather than that he is a problem.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 19:30:32

Ouryve: Well, quite. If a child did this, wouldn't you think an 'outstanding' school and its 'very strong staff' (as this idiot EP has put it) would gently steer the difficult parent and wayward child back on to the straight and narrow?

Yet, no one strangely, ever raised this with me. Not once. Not a quiet word or anything.

Disgraceful. They have sent a hard copy so I can't cut and paste but I feel like naming and shaming that woman. She is a complete disgrace to her profession.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 19:30:54

Ouryve: Well, quite. If a child did this, wouldn't you think an 'outstanding' school and its 'very strong staff' (as this idiot EP has put it) would gently steer the difficult parent and wayward child back on to the straight and narrow?

Yet, no one strangely, ever raised this with me. Not once. Not a quiet word or anything.

Disgraceful. They have sent a hard copy so I can't cut and paste but I feel like naming and shaming that woman. She is a complete disgrace to her profession.

TOWIELA Fri 26-Jul-13 19:43:11

Just don't get me started on 'outstanding' schools! My DS nearly had a depressive breakdown because of his 'outstanding' school and still suffers daily because of their 'methods' for getting him to read. Now wouldn't I just love to out that school!

To much wine too early on a Friday evening has brought me to weep tears of sheer anger because of your case IE.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 19:51:06

Oh no! Don't cry. They are not worth your tears. Bastards!

ouryve Fri 26-Jul-13 20:11:24

The boys' school is merely "good". I think there needs to be an unofficial classification of "bloody good" to be honest.

ouryve Fri 26-Jul-13 20:12:17

TOWIELA brew[tissues]

TOWIELA Fri 26-Jul-13 20:16:53

Thanks! Don't you mean "no bloody good"?

nennypops Fri 26-Jul-13 20:40:54

Are you going to do a formal complaint against the EP? Is it the Health Professions Council you complain to? The whole thing sounds so grossly unprofessional.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 20:47:39

It is so staged as well. The EP writes this email for a case she has no involvement in saying she happened to be at school for a transition surgery.

She copies in 7 people making comments about 'perhaps this should be raised with Tribunal' and 'this is harrassment' etc

Yet, no one answers her email. The SEN manager simply forwards it to a whole load of complaints team people and says right can we use this and the LGO's judgment to get the determination.

Really. The LGO have all this and say the LA was acting appropriately.

So what chance do you have with a professional body? Yet another complaint? I might ring the BPS as I do think this is shockingly bad practice. At best, she has just circulated a load of gossip but her comments about my son are what really grates.

TOWIELA Fri 26-Jul-13 20:54:48

It absolutely beggars believe that a professional person with no involvement in a case pokes her nose into something that she has no business to do! And the result of this unprofessionalism has been untold misery for your family. Solicitors are being named left right and centre on this board - I'd go for EPs too!

ouryve Fri 26-Jul-13 22:05:49

Nope. Definitely "bloody good", in our case. At no other MS school would DS1 have made it as far as year 5 without being kicked out.

Maybe we need a full set of MNSN classifications - bloody good, alright, meh and shite. No way would they correspond piecemeal with the OFSTED classifications.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 22:10:54

"I can safely say the whole school, adults and children, have been affected by this"

"staff …are so distressed that they are thinking of leaving”

"most learning takes place outside the classroom because it is ‘anxiety provoking'..."

"he tells his parents that his teachers aren’t completing specific targets when they are"

"there are other children who clearly require support at School Action or School Action Plus but who cannot receive it because time has to be devoted to one child”.

"This should be raised with the Tribunal"

All from an EP who wasn't even had any dealings with my son. All then circulated around the Council and then withheld from me but circulated to the LGO.

The LGO says - no problem, all appropriate behaviour from LA staff.

Would a professional body be bothered with this?

TOWIELA Fri 26-Jul-13 22:25:58

Omg. I am (nearly) speechless! I think this is def a complaint to her prof body as she has totally and utterly overstepped her professional remit. I would also think a solicitors letter to her personally. This is so not on and so totally inappropriate.

2tirednot2fight Fri 26-Jul-13 22:30:37

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 22:45:18

It's outrageous. And I had NO contact with this woman at all bar the SA 10 months before so its not as if this woman could even say it was her opinion.

It was so fixed and timed to get a vexatious determination but how dare this vile woman talk about my son like this. A highly vulnerable kid who couldn't even talk in school and was being referred for in-patient treatment at Gt Ormond St at this time.

TOWIELA Fri 26-Jul-13 22:54:54

Not only does it show appalling unprof by her but what the hell were the LA doing listening to her!

Why do LAs do this! In no other sector would this be allowed. At the very start of my Tribunal, I had a LA EP trying to remove my son's medical dx of anxiety. We argued over it for about an hour before the LA went away and reluctantly conceded that his dx - dx by two senior consultant doctors - should remain. No medical witnesses in the room but the LA EP thought she was above the medics - even the judge was scratching her head in disbelief.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 26-Jul-13 23:01:28


There is evidence of allegations circulating before this and the fact that it is presented to the complaints team as part of the package against me demonstrates that this was a put up job I think. Planned and organised by the SEN team to get the determination to stop me complaining and asking questions.

Lachanophobia Fri 26-Jul-13 23:18:34

It is indeed outrageous. I think some of these professionals are really stupid to think they can put what they want in writing without any comeback. They forget that parents can request a full copy of the records.
The sad thing is that this is not an isolated case. I have copies of some really damning notes and emails - it's just deciding what best to do with them. I plan to be unleashing my disgust and anger about this in the near future in the hope of making the public aware of how 'caring'some of these people really are. Good on you for keeping fighting IE.

nennypops Sat 27-Jul-13 10:05:47

"staff …are so distressed that they are thinking of leaving”

That's the one I like. She's seriously presenting a picture of a load of experienced school staff weeping and wailing and about to give up their jobs just because one parent is asking for her child's needs to be met. Even if you had been acting as parent from hell, this is just ridiculous. Teachers have to be capable of dealing with children with behavioural problems, children suffering severe neglect, children with serious health problems, complaining parents, annoying parents, demanding parents, you name it. In some schools they have to be capable of dealing with violent pupils and parents. Yet all of these teachers were apparently so feeble that they were reduced to a jelly by one person. And even though it was inherently ridiculous, the council eagerly accepted it because it suited their agenda. But it's beyond me why the LGO accepts it.

inappropriatelyemployed Sat 27-Jul-13 10:17:12

Quite - and at exactly the same time, the head was emailing me saying:

"We really do want to support DS, and yourself. (I realise it is stressful for you too.) Is there anything that we are not doing that we could/should do that would help further? If it is within our power, we will do what we can."

But she knew all of this was going on. Two faced mare.

inappropriatelyemployed Sat 27-Jul-13 10:19:16

You can see how a feckless Ed Officer might lap this kind of moaning up and spread it around but an educational psychologist?

It really is beyond me that she should be so unprofessional.

Lachanophobia Sat 27-Jul-13 11:23:54

We got all those sentiments from school - 'we are only acting in x's best interests', we are doing all we can for x etc,etc,'.
Then,when I complained about an issue, I had an onslaught of vitriol from the GB threatening legal action against me. I had simply said my views on matters that were totally true. I do have loads of evidence to support the claims but they didn't want to see that hmm.
I recommend that everyone obtains copies of their child's records as the deceit and dishonesty that goes on just beggars belief.

inappropriatelyemployed Sat 27-Jul-13 13:03:06

I agree. The extent to which adult professionals will lie is astounding, particularly when you consider these cases concern very vulnerable children. All to save their own necks.

You see that isn't about resources: it's about ethics and integrity.

WetAugust Sat 27-Jul-13 17:07:48


Wow! Just wow! I am enraged on your behalf.

She will almost certainly be a member of the Association of Educational Psychologists – this is their ‘union’ that provides them with legal advice in cases arising from their professional dealings. They have a website and on that website is their Handbook.

It bangs on about their members “right to be treated with dignity and respect” - something their clients (i.e. us parents) should also expect.

She's broken a whole host of rules by sending that email. Apart from libelling you she broken the DP Act by sending information to people who had no need to receive it (as evidenced by the fact that none felt they had an obligation or duty to acknowledge/respond to it. Even the GMC tells doctors not to share information with people without explicit consent.

The email was full of hearsay so she failed establish the actual facts before doing the LA's dirty work - that's very unprofessional and potentially very damaging to a child, i.e. by calling him a liar is she assessing him as delusional?

I would have her bits on a plate for breakfast. I would throw the book at her. She has totally exceeded her remit.

How on earth can that woman expect any respect for her or her profession when she has acted in such a cynical way?

Of course the minute you complain about her you'll trigger another whole round of 'vexatious parent'.

Ideally you would seek the opinion of another EP as to whether what your EP wrote was / was not within professional boundaries but to any sensible person the EP was well out of order.

You do seem to have an unfortunate number of bastards to deal with. Our 'EP' was the only good guy amongst our own caring carrots.

inappropriatelyemployed Sat 27-Jul-13 17:58:05

Thanks Wet. Interesting that the Council's position is:

"Sharing your personal information to those that have a need to know it within the Council is categorised as fair processing and meets the principles. It is one ‘arm’ of the data controller informing another."

Additonally "Not wishing to minimise that element of dissatisfaction – it appears that is a minor issue in the scheme of things."

I have quoted the case of Desmond v Foreman, Shenton, Elliott, Cheshire West and Cheshire Council and Cheshire East Council [2012] EWHC 1900 (QB) to them.

In case it helps anyone, it seems to support two propositions:

Firstly, that the fourth data protection principle requires positive and concrete steps to be taken to maintain the accuracy of personal data, particularly in cases like this where inaccurate data could have a serious effect on individuals.

Secondly, that defamatory statements are capable of infringing rights under Article 8 and the DPA (in particular, breaches of data protection principles 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6).

The Council seems to think that, because it is a Council, it can share data how it likes within its own body.

I don't think that IE has an unfortunate number of bastards to deal with. I think it's a normal number but most of don't dig like IE and uncover them.

Every time I HAVE dug I have found the same, it's just that I haven't dug in a limited no. of places and often not very deep.

inappropriatelyemployed Sat 27-Jul-13 18:20:42

Star, not sure about that. These bastards have been there on the surface. I have not dug to find that out.

The vexatious ban was obvious evidence of skullduggery, I have merely unearthed the detail behind it.

TOWIELA Sat 27-Jul-13 18:54:41

This is the thing with them. You really don't have to dig too deep to find this level of, dare I say it, corruption. Not to mention the unethical unprofessionalism of those involved. They don't even cover their tracks that well. It only takes a little bit of continuous digging to find the truth.

It still amazes me that in my professional life (and, I suspect, the majority of women on this board's professional lives), I/we are well respected professional women whose professional opinion is highly valued and sort after. Yet the minute we become a 'mum' and fight for our child we are accused of all nature of things that just would never in a million years be directed at us professionally!

inappropriatelyemployed Sat 27-Jul-13 20:09:49

I agree Towie. I think it is why it is so shocking. If you take your own ethics seriously, it is harder to understand how someone can act like this.

Wet, re-reading your email, you make a very good point in saying the "email was full of hearsay so she failed establish the actual facts before doing the LA's dirty work - that's very unprofessional and potentially very damaging to a child, i.e. by calling him a liar is she assessing him as delusional?"

Clearly, she was dismissing out of hand everything DS was saying without being his psychologist and without knowing if the child needed help rather than criticism and abuse.

But how do you deal with this? I need a friendly EP to ask.

inappropriatelyemployed Sat 27-Jul-13 20:13:30

Interestingly, I learn the EP, who is young, has taken voluntary redundancy so maybe the LA don't care about exposing her to trouble now she's on her way.

It was really bizarre yesterday. Adamant I couldn't have access then, as I pressed for them to confirm the person didn't work for the LA as they were being very vague about the exemption to disclosure, a sudden volte face and apology saying it's 'Ms X' and we just didn't realise she worked for the LA.

I am getting a new copy of the redacted email but from the redactions, she has clearly signed herself off with all her details so that is a bit unbelievable.

inappropriatelyemployed Sat 27-Jul-13 21:32:54

I should add Wet - she wasn't even DS' educational psychologist. Someone else had been advising school and had attended meetings. She was there for a transition review on another child so it's like they just bitched to any old professional walking in and that professional decided to circulate all the bitching as fact while adding their own prejudicial, judgmental comments.


WetAugust Sat 27-Jul-13 22:48:21

Sounds like she's going to be the LA's scapegoat if you do make a complaint. As she's already facing redundancy they'll hang her out to dry.

I think I would still complain - even if it's just about personal information being shared unnecessarily will all and sundry.

The people who are supposed to monitor / curb / oversee etc the council are the Councillors. Have you had any discussions with any of your Councillors about all this?

The way it usually works is that a Councillor who is not one of the majority party can make a fuss with his political opponents - unless his own side happen to chair the education committee etc. Once I started formal legal proceedings my Councillor, who had been really helpful, refused to talk to me any more.

Reading DS's school file did my head in as it contained similar inflammatory material, including an admission that they had indeed ignored his SENs "because his parents told us to".


inappropriatelyemployed Sat 27-Jul-13 22:58:16

Incredible indeed!

Councillors round here are appalling beyond belief. Honestly, I raised an issue about maladministration judgements not being passed on to councillors and I approached two councillors who both ignored me.

It's a rural county full of elderly councillors who seem useless and completely disengaged.

I have already been through a two stage complaint over lack of OT provision for a year which they have just forced me to lodge a complaint with the LGO again as they refused to accept anything despite not being able to demonstrate any evidence of his programme being in place.

The senior bitch at the top of the shit heap is the one responsible for using the EPs email to get me made vexatious so no chance of a fair hearing from her.

I will try and see if I can locate an EP to give it the once over and see if I can pursue for ethics.

Perhaps the complaint, in the first instance, should go back to the EP involved?

WetAugust Sat 27-Jul-13 23:29:05

It would only be fair to offer the EP the opportunity to comment on her email. I think she'll be very shocked to discover that she's been named as its source.
You may even find that you have an ally in her (ally doesn't look right??). She has nothing to lose, is out of their grip and probably doesn't want a complaint lodged when she's looking for work. Yes - I think she could be helpful.

Sadly your Councillors seem perfectly normal. Depressing really that as a nation we are so disinterested in proper governance.

I share your frustration IE. Every avenue seems to have a juggernaut blocking the way. I suppose the press is an option but that's one route I would ever go down.

Somehow you need to divide and conquer and the key to that may be a 'friendly' approach to the EP to see what information you can milk from her on the rest of the bastards.

But I do worry about the effect this will be having on your wellbeing. Although this is a useful vent if you're like me this will be on your mind 24/7. I remember those times very well.

WetAugust Sat 27-Jul-13 23:30:13


inappropriatelyemployed Sun 28-Jul-13 00:19:04

I wouldn't want to get accused of being vexatious and 'bullying' her!

I know what you mean about well being! What's that? The people who do this try and treat you like your insane for pursuing it like you should just let them get on with it.

Perhaps I should ask DS' EP, off the record, whether I should raise this with the EP who did this. DS's EP is very experienced and nearing retirement I would think. The other EP was pretty young. DS's EP was copied into this email and interestingly offered to attend school shortly after (though I did not know this had been going on). She would never have written this email.

WetAugust Sun 28-Jul-13 11:16:57

Yes- another EP's view would be the best way forward but I do think we already know that what she wrote was uncalled for.

DS used to come home from school when he was about 14 and tell me that everyone in his class had bullied him. I couldn't conceive of a class in which the whole lot were bullies so used to tell him they couldn't all possible be.
Then I saw his school file and the notes made by teachers that confirmed he was indeed being bullied by the whole class.
That's when I learnt just how widespread bullying was - it's the herd instinct and you spread the instinct by emails like the EPs, which effectively 'give permission' to bully - as a woman with her professional status is virtually encouraging it.

And we pay our taxes for this crap angry

inappropriatelyemployed Sun 28-Jul-13 11:21:31

Perhaps I should just email her and very blandly say we are in possession of an email dated XX and have been informed that she wrote it. We were very shocked to discover this and would like the opportunity to discuss it openly with her.

Maybe copy in our own EP to ensure we are not accused of 'bullying'

What do you think??

WetAugust Sun 28-Jul-13 12:01:10

I'd make it a much more friendly approach. I'd just tell her that you had recently been given an email and noted that she had expressed some views about your DS. Could we meet to discuss this?

Avoid all emotive words (shocked, discover etc).

Def copy in someone else - but ensure that someone else is not someone who may warn her off.

inappropriatelyemployed Sun 28-Jul-13 12:07:48

Thanks - something like

'I have been given an email which I have been told was written by you. It contains some comments about DS. I would very much appreciate the opportunity to chat with you about this face to face. Would this be possible? I am happy to pop into your office if that is easier.

I am copying X into this email as she has been very involved in DS's case

I hope to see you soon'

WetAugust Sun 28-Jul-13 12:22:41

]The LA has given me an email which contains some comments you've made about DS.

(by using the LA it shows that you have obtained this legitimately and with their blessing so she will think she's OK to talk to you about it).

It would benefit [DS] enormously if we could meet to have a chat about it.

(always benefit the child - not you. That way it's more difficult for them to refuse. It's also less confrontational. Don't use face-to-face - that could be perceived as hostile).

Would this be possible? I am happy to pop into your office if that is easier.

(yep - popping is always very casual grin)

I am copying X into this email as she has been very involved in DS's case

(no need to say this at all - arranging a meeting is a private matter. Now if you wanted your EP to attend that would be a different matter which obviously she should be aware of). No need whatsoever to tell her you are copying your EP - you'd just raise her suspicions).

I hope to see you soon'

Just my suggestions - feel free to ignore

inappropriatelyemployed Sun 28-Jul-13 12:30:31

Thanks Wet - that is really helpful. If I copy in DS's EP, she will notice that, so just thought I would make reference to it?

I suspect she will go straight to the nightmare manager at the top of the heap and ask what she should do.

inappropriatelyemployed Sun 28-Jul-13 12:36:28

Thanks Wet - that is really helpful. If I copy in DS's EP, she will notice that, so just thought I would make reference to it?

I suspect she will go straight to the nightmare manager at the top of the heap and ask what she should do.

nennypops Sun 28-Jul-13 13:44:59

Was this EP junior to someone else within that department? If so, you could argue the LA is not off the hook because her superior is still responsible for what she did.

inappropriatelyemployed Sun 28-Jul-13 13:49:45

She is one of the EPs. I have asked for details of her line manager presuming she was under a principal psychologist but have been given the head of statutory sen. Yet, this woman was the one who used the email to advance the vexatious determination!

I just want to make sure this doesn't happen to anyone else.

WetAugust Sun 28-Jul-13 14:43:48

Vicarious responsibility - they are all collectively responsible. Phelps v Hillingdon Borough Council - my favourite case, all about a girl who was let down by EPs - just as my DS was.

Don't copy your EP when you send the email to young LA EP. If you think your EP needs a copy send it separately or BC it if your email system allows you to.

inappropriatelyemployed Sun 28-Jul-13 14:53:43

Yes, that's right Wet. I suppose I need to be clear about the purpose of the approach. To give her the opportunity to explain why she thought this was appropriate action to take when dealing with a child she had no knowledge. Bear in mind that things had got so difficult for DS that we withdrew him two weeks after this email.

I would like to get her to acknowledge that she made inappropriate personal and judgmental comments when she had taken no steps to verify the facts she was being presented with and when she had no dealings with DS. This could clearly (and did) significantly damaged his ability to get his needs met.

Perhaps I will run it past my lawyer first.

WetAugust Sun 28-Jul-13 15:48:49

Yes - the objective in meeting her needs to be clear.

Is it to express your disgust at what she did - that may upset her temporarily and get it off your chest, but nothing meaningful will come of it

Is it to see who (if anyone) pressured her / originally made these comments - that could be useful ammo later

Is it to sound her out before making a formal complaint - I think that would just bring you another vexatious label

To me it's all about knowledge. OK - probably a bit Machiavellian but she needs to be made aware that personally, by writing that email, she has screwed up and that he only remedy that would keep me happy (from raising a formal complaint) was some 'insider' information as to how that email came to be written. Seems a perfectly reasonable demand to me grin

With that knowledge you increase your power.

inappropriatelyemployed Sun 28-Jul-13 15:54:39

Excellent advice as always Wet. Thanks for your help on this.

inappropriatelyemployed Mon 29-Jul-13 10:26:56

Mmm, solicitor advises not to approach her directly but to make a formal complaint if I want to pursue it.

WetAugust Mon 29-Jul-13 11:43:03

Well she would say that wouldn't she - she's a solicitor.

I think we sometimes get so wrapped up on doing what we perceive as 'the right thing' that we lose all sight of common sense and basic entitlements.

When I was divorcing I used a solicitor but that didn't stop me talking to my now exH about the divorce.

When I was battling the LA my solicitor was assisting but I was also writing my own letters to the LA, unapproved by the solicitor but praised for doing so when he saw them.

The fact that I had hired a solicitor for legal advice about LA's failure to provide did not preclude me having a 'natural dialogue' with the LA myself. Only after provision had finally been provided and I was then in 'revenge mode' bringing a case for damages, did I step right back and leave everything to the solicitor. However, during that time I was also managing the parallel LGO complaint singlehandedly without consulting the solicitor - and obviously with his blessing.

Never forget that you are allowed to be a questioning mother and for that you do not need legal cover. You seem to be relinquishing these rights.

KeepOnKeepingOn1 Mon 29-Jul-13 11:46:59

The difficulty seems to be that even if you do complain to the LA, they simply ignore the complaint. On the run up to tribunal hearing, a DP request showed that one of his EOTAS tutors was circulating malicious emails (including sending to the head honcho of SEN) and making comments to the IO about me.

In the confusion of half-messages, the facts were 'mis-recorded' so that the written record now indicated that the tutor had been racially harassed by the parents and refused to return. The matter was to be reported to the union and there was concern at sending another tutor to our home. In reality, the tutor had been racially harassed by a neighbour and I had spent on hour with the police giving a statement as her witness. Complaint disappeared into a black hole. Another complaint took 6 months to reply to - conveniently after the LA had conceded - that basically said, oh well, never mind, you got what you wanted and he's at indi ss so what's the problem?

Recent LA EPs that I have had contact with have both been trainees but have the arrogance to challenge medical diagnoses. One spent 2 pages of a recent report to tribunal challenging asd diagnosis given by DK and MS and accepted by the NHS. The other one only conducts limited assessment just in case they discover a problem and writes reports that omit key information and incorrectly records information as to when assessments were carried out and by whom and whether DS2 is a current patient (DS2 is a current SALT pt but the EP wrote in her report that he was discharged last summer). I just correct misinformation and copy in the supervisor. It will be a dark day for DC with SEN when they graduate.

inappropriatelyemployed Mon 29-Jul-13 11:59:21

Wet - I think the solicitor knows how keen this LA are to brand me vexatious if they can so she is warning me to watch my step by leaving myself open to allegations of vexatious conduct. This is why I thought copying in another EP might help prevent that.

Keeping - you could just be wrapped up in complaints forever can't you? I have solicitors who will address the inaccuracies but I did want this woman to know the damage she had caused.

Oh and the EP who did DS' tests only wanted to do observations. They never want to assess children formally or deal with them directly.

Perhaps I should just send the emails to our EP, say we are very distressed to find they were written by a colleague and ask for her suggestion about how to address this constructively.

WetAugust Mon 29-Jul-13 12:07:11

Sorry - I take your point. I was just reminding you that you do have a natural right to question the EP yourself if you so desired.

But when you discuss with your EP also discuss what remedy you want. An acknowledgment that all instances of this inaccurate and misleading email have been deleted?

inappropriatelyemployed Mon 29-Jul-13 12:23:00

There are some data protection lawyers helping with our lawful information sharing campaign and they will write something to address the inaccuracies although the LA will probably not remove the email.

I was going to wait for them as they can't do anything on it until next week.

My concern is that this will all by-pass the woman who actually wrote the email and that as she is taking redundancy she may actually have gone by the time we do something.

On a personal level, it just seems important that she sees and hears the impact on us of what she did and said.

But how you do that without being accused of circumventing complaints processes and being a complete loon is behind me. The whose system is set up for you to be forced in to complaints and then you are criticised for making complains.

inappropriatelyemployed Mon 29-Jul-13 14:17:59

WEt - would you mind if I PM'd you? I know you have a lot on your plate right now so feel free to say no.

WetAugust Mon 29-Jul-13 14:39:49

Yes - please feel free to PM me.

If you go down the official complaints route it will be months before you hear any result by which time she will have long gone. Thpe immediate 'off the record' meeting gives you the opportunity to directly express your dismay re the email - which, regardless of all the other issues you have with the LA, I maintain you do have the right to reply to.

inappropriatelyemployed Mon 29-Jul-13 15:11:55

Thanks - have PMd you.

hoxtonbabe Wed 31-Jul-13 16:17:46

Oh geezzz...I was going to say write to the HCPC, at they are the ones that will look at her moral and ethical conduct, and it makes no difference if she leaves the LA as long as she is still an EP and her actions could have potentially put her client (or in this case, you DC wasn't even a client so she should not have been making such comments?!?) at a disadvantage they will look at it provided you have enough evidence to back it.

I cant guarantee the outcome my dear, but it should make her think twice about such conduct as they do not want this. The LEA/NHS will simply cover and find excuses for her as that is what they all do, even when the person has so obviously done wrong

inappropriatelyemployed Wed 31-Jul-13 16:27:25

I have asked if we could meet and talk to this EP. She should confront the consequences of her actions directly and explain them to us. I can't imagine for one minute she will have the balls to do that.

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 02-Aug-13 20:15:31

A thought has just hit me about this email. This came from the LGOs file but they redacted loads of stuff from it on the basis it was third party information.

Now I have the unredacted email I am really further annoyed by the LGO.
Some of the redactions were the work email addresses of LA staff or references to school staff by name BUT big chunks of the redactions were all these allegations about DS. DS is mentioned in other parts of the email the LGO did no redact so it is not about redacting anything to do with him.

So why redact this info? Not only did they find this sort of conduct acceptable but they withheld info.

I had just filed another complaint with very clear evidence. But what is the point? i am clearly bonkers to think there is any chance of getting justice out of this.

But worse than that I am just inviting another personal kicking.

TOWIELA Fri 02-Aug-13 20:41:11

It's rubbish isn't it! Just every single turn, every single point, it's utter rubbish

it's all so unbelievably shoddy that no one will ever believe it's true. In any other area, none of this would happen. A convicted murderer has more rights than us or our disabled children!

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 02-Aug-13 22:47:51

I know. You should be able to complain without thinking you will get ten tons of vitriol and personal abuse aimed at you for it.

Why the LGO feel they need to be so abusive is beyond me.

MaccaPacca123 Sun 04-Aug-13 17:34:10

IE, haven't posted so far, but been lurking and thinking... The EP. She's been fed a load of misinformation, manipulated into writing the "less-than-professionally-perfect" email angry. And probably a lot more. Given your profession, one would have expected her to tread more carefully.

Now she's leaving/left the LA. Why? And why now? (Jumped? Pushed?). I bet your line of work was withheld from her until recently. And I wonder which other local cases she was given. Could she have been set up as a convenient fall-guy for all the unlawful/ difficult/ expensive cases?

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 09-Aug-13 20:20:06

Just found out she has already left. Redundancy. There is alot of it about at county hall!

She did DS's SA assessment and I think she must have known my profession as they were all gossiping about it in emails with the NHS.

So I think this is why they decided to disclose her name. She's not here. May as well dump her in it.

No chance of getting an explanation from the horse's mouth now.

TOWIELA Fri 09-Aug-13 20:42:01

That really sucks! Nasty people tho, not even loyal to ex-employers! Can you still pursue a complaint to her professional body?

Summerhasloaded Fri 09-Aug-13 21:28:00

Can an employer also be liable for an employee's actions? IF she's done wrong, perhaps she hasn't been supervised properly :-D

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 09-Aug-13 22:11:31

Line manager has said they'll speak to me about it all but I imagine it'll be easy just to shrug and blame it on a rogue or naive EP.

How this squares with the marvellous LGO's genius interpretation of this all being beyond reproach. Incredible.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now