To think the council isn't allowed to deny providing transport on the basis that my child can be late every day if I provide it?

[Senmater]

My DD is in primary school and has an EHCP, as well as a blue badge. She goes to a different primary school to her siblings, as her siblings' primary could not meet her needs (they formally refused her, then appealed against being named when the council tried to name them regardless). I tried to move her siblings (also primary )to her school but there is no space. Both schools start at exactly the same time.
I am putting her siblings in breakfast club daily, so that I can get everyone to school on time. My DD would not cope in breakfast club/breakfast club would not cope with her.
I asked the council for a transport personal budget to cover this cost, which is far cheaper than a taxi to take my DD to school. I have said that if they refuse this on principle, we would accept a taxi, but this is a far less efficient use of funds as it would be a lot more expensive.
The council have refused on the basis that my DD could be late everyday, and apparently her school says that is fine. The school have never told me this, in fact I have been told the exact opposite by the class teacher.
As she has autism, being late and changing her routine would cause her a great deal of distress. I also view her learning as important and do not consider it reasonable that she misses the first part of school everyday.
Can anyone advise on the legal basis here? Siblings are too young to travel independently to school (one is in infants), and my DD has a blue badge and complex needs and therefore cannot travel independently.

If I didn't send her siblings to breakfast club, she would be late as I cannot physically do two different school drop offs at the same time.

I have two suggestions.

Your local authority legally has to have independent advisers for parents of children with SEND who can give advice on matters like this. The title varies but they are often called something like Parent Partnership or SENDIASS. These days the funding is sparse so they may be very part time and you may not get through to someone immediately, but persist.

There is often a parent-run group too, probably called something like [Borough] Parent Forum. Mine was great for all sorts of things - they ran activities for children and sometimes for siblings, publicised other groups and activities, ran training on EHCPs, and had coffee mornings and a closed Facebook group so you could interact with other parents. You might meet people with the same immediate issue and you could work together.

Also, one earlier post suggested asking for the LA policy. This is irrelevant: LAs often try to set “policies” to circumvent their legal responsibilities but policies do not and cannot override the law. The relevant section of the Education Act is what determines eligibility to transport and they must comply with it regardless of any policy they have set to try to further restrict access. If they try this point out that it is unlawful and appeal.

Why should the tax payer cover the cost of getting your children to school just because one has Autism?
I know plenty of families juggling children in different schools, financing breakfast and after school clubs or when cutting working hours. Some of their children also have disabilities.

SENDIAS are generally utterly useless and although they are meant to be independent they are paid by the LA and in cahoots with LA staff (their colleagues) so I wouldn’t trust them whatsoever OP.

If you need further advice contact IPSEA or SOSSEN.

DLA isn't an unlimited pot of money

Agree with others that you need to get the criteria. Not all SEN children are automatically entitled to transport, I’m not sure where you have got that information from, but I know at least for our council family logistics is not a good enough reason to be eligible for transport.

Do most secondary school children make their own way? Genuine question. I grew up in the country and we were majority dropped off and picked up by our parents due to poor transport options. My parents juggled 7 years of two schools until we were all though to secondary and beyond.

I think this is what you use your DLA/PIP or whatever you receive for. Or you get your dd to school well on time, most schools have a 10 minute window or so from when gates open to when they close. And then you drive your other 2 to school late because they are not SEN and can cope a bit better.

I have 2 dc to get to 2 different schools. Usually one gets the bus, but if not, Dh and I head off in separate directions to take them. I think some of the assumption here is that children have two parents and both parents are responsible for getting them to school. If your DD’s dad is not willing to do that, it’s his responsibility to support funding that because that’s part of parental responsibility, not the state, above and beyond DLA, etc that is already paid.

This is what your benefit payment is for 🤷🏻‍♀️

Because they often cannot go to their local school. OP states her DD has a blue badge therefore she cannot walk to school. Some children with severe disabilities are allocated a school a hour or more away because the State has made totally insufficient provision of local schools for disabled children. Some parents may not have a car to get them there and they may be inaccessible by public transport. Some parents may have full time jobs to not be able to spend 4 hours per day doing round trips to the nearest appropriate school for their child.

Your comment shows you literally have no clue what hell the parents of children with disabilities have to endure in order for their children to eventually be able to access a full time education which mainstream state schools cannot provide for them. Getting an appropriate school placement can take years during which time many children are often left with no education at all. Parents’ careers are destroyed, their health is destroyed by the stress and it can cost tens of thousands of pounds enforcing the child’s basic legal right to access education through tribunals because it is obstructed by Local Authorities deliberately at every stage of the process.

It is not the fault of parents or disabled children that the state is utterly failing to provide appropriate schools for disabled children with a range of needs. We would be scathing of a developing country that failed to provide an adequate full time education to all children and it has been clearly set out as a requirement in UK law for decades so it is completely unacceptable for this to be the reality in the UK.

Disabled children aren’t the source of the country’s problems. I suggest you learn a bit about economics and read some of the harrowing accounts of the trauma caused to children and their families by the utter failing of the education system to provide suitable education for these children, which the so-called Education Secretary intends to make far worse with her absurd proposals, to the detriment not only of these children but all children in mainstream state schools.

Go and find a new hobby horse that doesn’t simply demonstrate a huge level of ignorance to all who read your comments.

No. Child DLA categorically is NOT for providing school transport. That is an entirely separate system and part of the schools budget, it has nothing to do with the DWP who administer DLA. DLA is to cover a proportion of the additional costs of the child’s disability in their home life, not pay for educational needs. And it is well documented that the DLA comes nowhere near close to covering that so families with disabled children aren’t already significantly financially disadvantaged compared to those without, despite DLA.

The OP didn’t ask for your opinions on the national funding arrangements for children with disabilities. She asked what the law states and what to do to ensure her DD can access the full school day at the school she has been allocated, as is her legal right.

How disgusting that people are using this as an opportunity to have a go at a parent struggling to juggle all of this and express their apparent disgust that disabled children, the most vulnerable members of our society, have a legal right to go to school. Some of these comments are shameful.

If you want legal advice you need to post in legal not AIBU.

Thank you. The amount of anti-disability comments on here is staggering, as well as the assumptions. I am just asking for help with the legality as you said, and made the mistake of posting here for traffic.

I have never said anything about benefits: I work (in a difficult public sector job, though that isn't relevant here)

Have you had a chat with IPSEA? (ipsea.org.uk) They help advocate for families of SEN kids and may be able to help you here.

Totally unreasonable that school says one thing and class teacher says the other (and I think the class teacher is right to say it is an issue/disruptive for your child, the teacher and her classmates to have her arrive late every day). I

You would need to show either your child can’t walk the distance or they can but there is good reason why you can’t accompany your child to school by walking (assuming it’s within 2 miles). Other children aren’t usually accepted as good reason but it depends on individual circumstances. As your other children can and do use a breakfast club then the council has likely relied on that as why you don’t have a good reason as you can get all children to school. If you pulled your children out of breakfast club the council is saying that’s still fine because your child could be late. But in a way that irrelevant as they would say using a breakfast club is something lots parents have to do and it’s reasonable to expect you to do that. If neither school had a breakfast club then you would have a stronger case that it’s unreasonable to expect you to accompany. If you can show you can’t afford the breakfast club or can’t get to work on time your case would be stronger.
You could apply for a social care assessment and if you got some direct payments use that to pay for breakfast club.
If your child cannot physically walk the distance to school because of SEND even if accompanied by an adult then they are eligible for transport and the council would decide what the most cost efficient way was - which could be paying for your other children’s breakfast club. if they have a blue badge there must be evidence they can’t walk far even if accompanied by an adult so they may meet this criteria. This is what you need to focus on
DLA is not part of the legal test either the child can walk the distance required or they can’t and either it’s reasonable to expect the parent to walk them or it’s not (eg a disabled single parent may not be expected to do so)
SENTAS charity gives free advice and can help you
Has the council assessed if your child can walk to school? Often they forget the legal test is a walking test and rely on parents driving.

Thank you. It has been such a struggle to get the support my child needs, and this school was allocated against my preference. It is so difficult to get support for Sen kids in this country.

I know. There are some appalling people around who have been watching too much GB “news” and never bothered to look at the national spending allocations, the largest items of which by far are state pension welfare and healthcare (the vast majority of which is also spent on the over 65s).

Disabled children are not the reason for the country’s economic problems (I work in economics). And neither is that what you asked. I’m sorry you had to read this ignorant and spiteful nonsense.

Please look at my first post on your thread. It states the requirements per the law and the relevant section of the law. The LA has a legal duty to provide transport to your DD if she has a blue badge therefore cannot possibly walk to the allocated school. You don’t need to mention your other children. Simply quote this section of the law to them and tell them they need to arrange transport to get her there.

Yanbu

And this is why we need decent SEN provision in every community. It's bonkers having SEN children shipped all over the place at huge expense. Bonkers that our most vulnerable children are all being popped in taxis every day.

Believe me, I understand. It has trashed my health, finances and career, as well as much of my children’s childhood. It is a disgrace and the clueless posters piling on without the slightest idea of the absolute hell parents go through just so that their child can attend school should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. Ignore them.

Thank you, the legal basis is what is relevant. Unfortunately it was drowned out a bit by the irrelevant benefit comments. I appreciate your advice.

You say that the LA has the duty to supply transport for SEN children. Could you use this argument to apply for a taxi to get your SEN child to her school while you get the rest to theirs on time. You are then presenting a simple argument based on a single criteria rather than a more involved argument based on several variables which gives the LA more chance to refuse.
Ibviously this is dependent on you being happy for her to be in the taxi unaccompanied, whether this is okay may depend on her age (not in England so not sure if taxi would come with an attendant).

Absolutely. So any posters who have a bee in their bonnet about transport costs should be replying to the consultation issued by the “Education Secretary” which proposes policies to make these problems far, far worse, and try to shove even more children into mainstream state schools which are totally unsuitable for them. This will not only wreck any prospect of the disabled children receiving and education but also make things ten times worse for the children for whom mainstream school IS appropriate, with more disruption and unmet need and children in their classes for whom the school is quite clearly totally inappropriate.

The obviously needed solution is a far wider variety of schools locally catering to different types of needs/ abilities so that teachers can teach similar children together, classes are calm and suitable for the children in them, different educational approaches and curriculums can be adopted for different children, and all children can go to school without trauma or travelling for miles in taxis or ending up out of school entirely for years.

One-size-fits all has manifestly failed and yet with have an “Education Secretary” so utterly stupid that she thinks doubling down on this will improve things. Look forward to even more teachers leaving the profession and your children being taught by supply and in classes so disrupted that nobody learns a single thing. And she has the disingenuousness to pretend that this will be for the benefit of children, rather than at least having the decency to admit that it is purely about trying to save money, to the detriment of every single child in the state system.

It would be nice if posters could at least learn the basics about a topic before posting their ignorant bile. However, this wasn’t what this thread is about, so if they are determined to do this perhaps they could start a new thread about it rather than write it on the OP’s thread which was about her specific child and what she should do within the current system to ensure her DD can get to school. The OP is not responsible for the failed structure of state education which pretends that all children are little clones for whom the same environment and curriculum will be appropriate and that children with disabilities don’t exist.

This is a good point - can you claim DLA/PIP and use it to cover breakfast club?

I see that hiding in amongst the disgusting posts you've had some excellent advice. I agree with PP that AIBU isn't the best place for this as so many just want to pile on you. Maybe Report your post and request a move to Legal or SEN board?

Best of luck, YANBU!