flow4, thanks - it was actually IPSEA that provided us with the barrister to get their statements.
The problem is that the local school is unsuitable for them. I have sent them to another one that does have the right facilities, at the recommendation of their own educational psychologist. Whenever they issue a revised statement it says in bold that because we haven't sent them to the nearest school, we have to pay the transport otherwise it would be a drain on public funds.
Naturally if families choose a school on the basis of religion, transport is covered. Just not if you happen to be disabled and need to go somewhere with a fully staffed health centre, smaller site, etc.
Fine, you think, only there is no other school within safe walking/cycling distance and they have consequently started paying for bus passes from our village for all the local children to get to their nearest school (after one of the governors' children was knocked off her bike on the main road - an accident that was waiting to happen - kids have to cross at a place where cars are going at 60 mph between villages on a commuter route, with no lighting etc).
All I wanted from the LA was the same amount that they spend on the other children to put towards my train fares for my children, with me topping it up, so no extra drain on the public purse at all. In the event, we are worse off than the other families as we get absolutely nothing. I can't see how that is in any way fair. It's a bit like punishing us because we have non-standard children.