Is this appropriate conduct for solicitors?

[AugustaFinkNottle]

A solicitors' firm which acts for councils in special educational needs tribunals has tweeted the following:

"Great ABA Trib win this week ... interesting to see how parents continue to persist with it. Funny thing is parents think they won ;)"

I can't link to it due to having been blocked but it's been retweeted, e.g here.

The original tweet resulted in numerous complaints and a quick change to the tweet.

The case they're triumphalising about will have involved a disabled child. Lovely.

oh forgot to add. I used a specialist firm of lawyers - which I now know is why my LA attacked me so much. At the point when BS was involved, my lawyers implored me to go to the press with my "story". I refused because I thought no one would believe me.

It's a funny old world.

I think in many ways that tweet about the "emotive world of SEN" is one of the most offensive. In essence, he is saying that all parents and people on their side are being emotive, i.e. suggesting that their concern for disabled children is weak and emotional - it also carries implications that he's saying it's exaggerated. I can remember talking to an SEN solicitor who said Small had accused her of being emotive when she opposed a late application for postponement by reference to the prejudice it would cause to a child who had been out of school for a long time.

That really tells us everything we need to know about his views on parents. If you become distressed about your child's difficulties, if you fight for support, if you point out that a professional shouldn't poke fun at you - you're just being emotive, so your view can be ignored. For that reason alone, I don't see how anyone could contemplate instructing him as solicitor in an SEN case, on either side.

To me, the most offensive one was the swimming pool. Totally understand that it's ok for a lawyer to make money - I have absolutely no problem with that. But very offensive to tweet a picture of such opulence when he knows the very audience he is engaging with are the parents of disabled children. Whether the villa/swimming pool is really his own is totally irrelevant. It is a totally despicable tweet from a education lawyer directly aimed at parents of children with disabilities.

user, he has disclosed confidential information about the case. Put yourself in the position of the LA here. He has either reached terms of agreement in this case or has received a decision on the case, and he has advised his clients that the result is favourable to them. If the case was settled, he must have told his client that the parent is happy with the terms, which is something they need to know because they have to carry on dealing with that parent and child. If the case was decided on by the tribunal, he must have received the information that the parent is happy from the other side, i.e. that is information that was passed on to him in his capacity as the LA's solicitor. He has almost certainly advised his client that in his view the result is a victory for them despite what the parent thinks. All of that is information that is confidential to his client and he has an absolute duty to keep it confidential - amongst other things, from the parent in question.

So what he has done is to publish it online. I think there's every chance that parent has seen it, and now knows the information and advice he has given the LA. That parent also knows that the solicitor employed by the LA, who has seen all sorts of confidential information about his child, thinks it appropriate to write about the case and poke fun at him or her on a very public forum.

So, just think about it. If you were the LA in question, would you feel that that solicitor had complied with his duty of confidentiality? And how would you feel about what he has done to your relationship with that parent, and all other parents in your area?

Could those still to submit their complaints/reports please consider linking this thread, as it shows the real impact of his actions.

On the Sunday (or maybe the Monday?) he tweeted that BS regretted their actions and was going to denote an undisclosed amount of money to a children's hospice. This was at the stage when he was saying the tweets were coming from the Baker Small account and that the appropriate disciplinary action would be taken.

The tweet about the denotation was extremely offensive, cynical and disingenuous. To drag a children's hospice into his mess just leaves me speechless.

I've just seen this quote from him in the latest Guardian article:

“It is a nasty little system, the SEN system. It pitches professionals against professionals, schools against parents, in quite adversarial proceedings. When it goes wrong, the process that is there to solve it is not fit for purpose – the tribunal system.”

None of that needs to happen if LAs do their jobs properly. It simply cannot be news to LAs that, for instance, they must set out support in an EHCP in detailed and specific terms, yet they ignore that again and again and again. SEN charities and professionals are currently highlighting the fact that far too many LAs are choosing to ignore the law on the process of transferring statements to EHCPs, and again that law couldn't be clearer. The reality is that LAs won't change their ways when they have lawyers like this who duck and dive and do their best to help them carry on down precisely the same path.

As for nastiness - for parents, the nastiest aspect of the tribunal system is coming up against lawyers who manipulate the system, don't prepare cases properly, and accuse them of being emotive for just wanting their children's needs to be met. If anything, the problem in the past has been that the tribunal hasn't been really prepared to take the bull by the horns and control the sort of conduct exhibited by BS, though they're not the only ones guilty of it. I hope this episode will have opened their eyes to the need to do so.

I am hoping that this is a blessing in disguise for the SEN world. I'm under no illusion that there aren't other firms out there ready to step into BS shoes. But just maybe some good will come of it.

For those on twitter, keep tweeting! There are many LAs with BS contracts who haven't responded yet. Then next onto central government - particularly the DofEd who has been giving LAs substantial sums of money to implement the EHCPs. In some cases, the DofEd might just as well cut out the middle man (the LA) and given the money directly to BS.

Is this true, no complaints?
Statement from law society today.

'‘Local Authorities have ceased instructing Baker Small but I would like it noted that we have not received any complaints about the services provided to them. We have had no complaints in the six years of operation from our clients and we have provided a high standard of service and support. In some cases we have placed our staff directly in SEN teams to deal with staffing issues and the pressures faced as a result of the Children and Families Act.

‘I look forward to co-operating with the SRA with the hope of re-establishing Baker Small’s presence in the sector in the future.’

I know Starlight - I just cannot seem to bring Warwickshire to the surface. I have emailed everyone I can think of.

Worcestershire is another one that is keeping quiet, considering they spent £82000 on them last year.

I contacted Robin Walker MP

Norfolk LA have posted a press release on their website:

www.norfolk.gov.uk/news/2016/06/statement-regarding-baker-small

They end by saying "We can confirm that the County Council has spent approximately £120,000 with the company in the past year."

Jeremy that statement is from Mark isn't it rather than SRA?

Jeremy

I think the law society has spectacularly missed the point here. No parent has ever complained about the acts of specific lawyers (although I nearly did back at the height of my tribunals). Instead we either have to do JR or a LGO complaint against the LA (ie not against the solicitors they employ). I remember reading a few months back that one of the LGOs biggest areas of complaints is LAs and SENDIST

Ooops - x-post

Yes, published on their website, I just wondered if it was true? I thought that someone on this thread had made a complaint some time back.

www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/councils-fire-sen-law-firm-over-gloating-tweets/5055874.article

I have made direct complaints about a number of professionals who have worked on my daughter's case when their behaviour appeared to be in bad faith. However, I only ever complained if I felt that it would result in an improvement for my daughter. I don't really have the energy for it. Her school didn't invite me to her last AR but I didn't complain because I wanted the school to back me , which they did.

I do not think tribunals should allow badly prepared cases to be adjourned. If the case has to be adjourned for a reason like that then I think the LA should have to pay the parents costs.

I've read the article (thanks for the link). This quote is from no less than the main man himself, Mark Small. If you're reading this Mr Small, of course there's been no complaints - we too busy dealing with the fall out after you have been near us! Rebuilding shattered relationships with LAs. Starting JR. Sending in complaints about our LA to the LGO. Oh yes, and also busy with our children. And of course your clients are going to complain about your appalling behavior - they've actively sold their soul into it at the cost of the public purse!

‘Local Authorities have ceased instructing Baker Small but I would like it noted that we have not received any complaints about the services provided to them. We have had no complaints in the six years of operation from our clients and we have provided a high standard of service and support. In some cases we have placed our staff directly in SEN teams to deal with staffing issues and the pressures faced as a result of the Children and Families Act. ' Statement from Mark Small on Law Society Gazette website.

Yes, sorry, I wasn't very clear, it was by Mark Small and published by the law society gazette.
I am angry again now as he clearly intends to continue in this field.

He also posted on the other Twitter account that's still up that he was grateful for people accepting his apology

Here

No one sent you DMs Mark. Stop lying.

Just featured on BBC South Today.