In-year appeal - is this a strong case?

Even if every single LA did this (and they don't - those I know about wouldn't dream of doing anything like this), it wouldn't make it legal. Basic public law principles apply - any decision must be lawful, rational and fair. My view is that a process that relies on swaps would fail on at least two of those principles should a parent take it to judicial review, possibly all three. The fundamental in child law is that the child's best interests must come first. A process that, instead of looking for a move to the school best placed to serve the child's best interests, looks for a school with another problem pupil that is willing to do a swap, is clearly not about the child's best interests.

Sorry. LA not language. Autocorrect getting a bit above itself

This is what happens, very openly, in every LANGUAGE and MAT I have ever had any involvement with

If this is actually what happens in your LA I have serious concerns about their compliance with the law.

All schools should be involved in the Pupil Placement Panel (or Fair Access Panel), not just those who want to arrange managed moves. A school may choose not to be involved, but it then risks having to admit any pupils allocated by the panel.

Whilst there is no statutory scheme for managed moves, putting them through the Pupil Placement Panel is not best practise. Regardless of which schools are on the panel and whether they deal with managed moves, there is no way schools should be negotiating swaps and bartering. I suspect the LGO would have a field day if they discovered anything like this happening. Indeed, if parents discovered this was going on, the schools and LA involved could face a very costly court case. Whatever process is followed, the best interests of the child must be at the heart of it. Negotiating swaps clearly shows that has been forgotten in favour of administrative convenience.

A managed move would not be the right solution in all situations, but sometimes a fresh start can help to break the bad behaviour patterns.

Since the receiving school can say no, they're going to need convincing that the fresh start might be most of what is needed. The move can also be reversed, so it's not in the original school's interest to suggest it if it's unlikely to work - both because they'll get the kid back and because the receiving school will be less likely to take anyone in the future. So a school is only likely to suggest a managed move if they think it will work.

Why? Sometimes a fresh start is the perfect intervention

So instead of working to manage the behaviour, the school is trying to punt him on to another school and make all the issues he currently has their problem? What have they done to address these behaviour concerns? Does he have supports, diagnosis, teaching assistance, etc at this school? Will the new school be able to provide support that the current one can't? Just deciding (the school) that all his difficult behaviours are better managed (foisted off) to a new school, would set some alarm bells ringing for me.

managed moves are set up through the fair access panel. This is made up of any local school wanting to be able to arrange such moves for children on their roll. In return they agree to consider children on the rolls of other schools Child bartering is not a nice way of putting it, but that’s what it is. I’ve sat on these fair access Panels, and believe me, we barter !

anyway, the swapping aspect of managed moves is irrelevant to the OP. She is considering asking for one, and just needs to understand it will not be her choice where.

Schools can and do take children on managed moves all the time, without any sort of child bartering going on. The school I am a governor of has done it several times, and it was discussed widely at some recent LA training I did in another capacity. There is no requirement or expectation that it be any sort of reciprocal arrangement. It would be impossible if it did. Children are not badges to be swapped in the playground.

It does require the agreement of both heads, and of course if a head gets a reputation for always saying no, they may find themselves shouting into the wilderness if they themselves ever need it...

Yes they are swaps. No school is going to take such a child without the benefit of knowing they were going to have the opportunity of passing a similar child on

@LargeLegoHaul Ok.

@TizerorFizz I didn’t think the school had offered a managed move, I just answered OP’s question about managed moves across LA boundaries.

@LargeLegoHaul
Apologies. My point was that managed move has not been mentioned by the school at all. Across boundaries or otherwise. I assumed you thought it was on offer.

A managed move is not a swap. It is a considered and mutually agreed (with parents, child and schools) trial which if successful becomes a permanent move. There is no swap required.

You can ask your chosen school to put her in the waiting list though

You need to ask the school for a managed move. It won’t be to a school you chose though. It will be a straight swap with another pupil in another school

You have to show that the detriment to your child is greater than the detriment to the school in taking a pupil when technically full

This, yes. However, this, no:

An appeal hinges on it being that school and only that school that meets your needs

The parent only has to make their case with regard to the first statement and in regard to the school being appealed for. There may be other schools which they feel can equally meet their DC's needs, possibly better, and they may also have applied to and be appealing a decision not to offer a place at any or all of them, but they are not the subject of this appeal. True, the panel may enquire as to which schools they have looked at in order to decide that this o e warrants an appeal, or parents may volunteer that information, but the burden I'd not the same as proving 'exceptional medical or social need', where the second statement would be relevant.

@TizerorFizz I am not sure why you have tagged me in your post because I haven’t posted whether there should be an appeal or not and I didn’t comment on the school attempting to off roll. Others had already posted about that so I had no reason to repeat what others had posted. My first post asked about an EHCNA and my second was in reply to OP asking whether schools can arrange a managed move across LAs, which they can.

Others have beaten me to this - your school are trying an illegal exclusion.

@LargeLegoHaul
Except the school have not done it or helped. There should not be an appeal. This is really exclusion by the back door.,

There’s nothing preventing a managed move across a LA boundary, although some schools might not like it because they are likely to have a closer relationship with other schools in the same LA.

The school cannot suggest a parent finds another school. This is, in effect, an exclusion. It’s not going through the exclusion process and they are dodging the effort required for a managed move. This is not acceptable. The school should use the managed move arrangements and broker a deal. If DC bounces back, so be it. They then need to consider exclusion if misdemeanours warrant it.,