I think the critical information I want from the other LA is whether the error was restricted to the LA or whether there was any contribution to/cause of the error by either the schools Foundation or the school itself. So unless anyone comes back and says, not a good idea, maybe I'll put that to that LA tomorrow and see what response I get.
prh thank you. Again :)
vive thanks for your input: really pleased to hear your DD is happy. We have been thinking long and hard about our DD. We would not want her to struggle and really do not believe she will struggle. There are a number of factors that bring us to that conclusion: she is level 5 all round (top 5 for reading/writing); as of next month she will be studying music theory grade 4 which is GCSE level (her piano tutor has offered a letter in support of our appeal).
(Incidentally, although our appeal is based not on non-qualification but on maladministration, we decided to pull all our rabbits out of the hat to ensure her case is as strong as possible).
On the day of the test, she was very nervous, and she had timing issues which contributed to her score. But we did not contemplate appealing on the basis of non qualification - arguably we had no grounds to do so). But this is a completely different story now.....
Critically (going back to her ability to cope) we have seen what's expected in the first two years from her sister. Whilst her sister is on a different level (she was on the gifted/talented register) we know what score, particularly the first year. So looking at the picture as a whole we feel she won't struggle - and she will have the support she needs.
A more general comment about the 11+ and results (because of various comments made over the past few days). The 11+ and similar selective tests do do not separate the thickos from the geniuses. Nor is the test intended to be 100% proof of a child's academic ability. In someone else's words, it is a crude, but necessary, brief snapshot of a child's potential academic ability on a single day.