Can a primary school withdraw an offer once accepted and offer to someone else?

[Starlight987]

I’m looking for some advice about a school admissions issue because I’m not sure what’s happened here.

Last week I was offered a place for my son at a primary school for an in-year admission. I accepted the offer over the phone, and yesterday I went to view the school. When I arrived, the office manager asked why I wanted to move my son. I explained that I don’t feel he’s getting the right support at his current school and that he has special needs.

I could tell something felt a bit off during the conversation she seemed quite reluctant. She said she would speak to the headteacher to arrange a meeting, but I never heard back. When I called today to follow up, she told me they’d now offered the place to another child who has an EHCP and apologised, saying she only found out when she spoke to the headteacher.

I’m finding the timing quite suspicious, especially as everything seemed fine until I mentioned my son’s additional needs. I’ve already spoken to the council and they said the school shouldn’t really have done that, and they’re going to speak to their manager about it.

Has anyone had anything similar happen or know if this is allowed? Can a school just withdraw a verbal offer like that after a visit? I’d really appreciate any advice or experiences I just want to make sure I’m doing the right thing for my son.

I hope you get the answers OP. From a y3 class teachers point of view, it’s so unfortunate but as someone who had just received an in year teacher of a child with an ehcp, the thought of another one making the class size 32, is hard to take. But totally not your fault.

If they felt like they couldn’t meet my child’s needs I would have preferred for them to be upfront and honest about it, rather than saying they’ve offered the place to another child that has the EHCP which I don’t fully believe due to the timing of everything

The trouble is if you have a SENbetweener who may need an EHC plan but doesn’t yet have one, it is likely you will come across a lot of schools that “don’t think they can meet need”/ “maybe aren’t the right fit”/“ unfortunately we are full”. I am not blaming the schools at all as they have limited resources but the OP may well find none of the schools she prefers have oodles of money/ sufficient TAs etc. So it is important that school admission authorities follow the letter and spirit of the law. Otherwise what happens is that the schools which are more inclusive and willing to make adjustments are left to pick up the pieces.

I also think the timing is highly suspicious. EHC plan = often but not always equals extra money for the school. No EHC plan yet often means no additional funds, and a whole ream of paperwork incoming if they do choose to support an EHC needs assessment.

OP you could consider making the request for an EHC needs assessment yourself. It doesn’t need to come from the school and despite what schools and LAs might tell you, there is no requirement for x amount of money to already have been spent before an application, and nor is it correct that “the LA doesn’t assess kids like Bob as he is too high functioning/ doesn’t have a diagnosis/ needs to wait for his paediatrician appointment/ doesn’t meet the threshold”. The only criteria that needs to be met in order for an LA to be legally required to carry out an assessment is:

• that the child or young person has or may have special educational needs; and
• that they may need special educational provision to be made through an EHC plan.

It's not relevant that OP's child doesn't have an EHCP. The only thing relevant is that the school are trying to withdraw the place after it's been made, which they can only do if the place has been offered in error within a 3 day timescale.
I'm a fair access officer so deal with in year admission applications all the time.
Send the email. Expect the school and local authority to look into it properly. If they still say there is no place then you can appeal.

There is also no criteria under the Admissions Code for a school to turn down an application because after meeting the child or parent the school decides they can't meet need!! Can you imagine the chaos if schools were allowed to do this ?

"Confirmation of the exact date the EHCP naming the school was finalised and recorded on your system;
Confirmation of the date and time my son’s offer was entered and accepted on the admissions system;"

I think this part of your email is a bit of a red herring. It doesn't matter what has gone on behind the scenes, i.e. what administrative processes have occurred. At the point that you got a phone call offering you the place, the clock started ticking. If the school hasn't informed the LA immediately, and in the meantime they've allocated a place to a child with an EHCP, tough. If the LA has allocated a place to a child with an EHCP and hasn't informed the school, such that they think there is a place to offer, tough. They should have clear systems that prevent double allocation, and allow mistakes that do slip through to be corrected in sufficient time.

Policy might say that the school should have said 'We believe there may be a place available and applications are processed through the online portal at the LA'. In that case, had the place not been available, you hadn't been offered it, so no harm.

Even if the school should not have offered a place and instead directed you to the LA, the fact that they did offer you a place gave you a 'reasonable expectation' and the fact that the mistake was not corrected promptly means you keep the place.

What’s worrying is I’ve read (after doing some research on the school) that the school tried to say to one of the mum’s that they can’t meet her son’s needs but she still went ahead and sent him there and now he’s thriving. Hence why I’m not feeling suspicious with what the school said to me

It really isn't relevant what has been said about your son's needs. What you need to focus on is how the allocation has been duplicated. The school can say anything they like.

I think you have misunderstood me (if you are responding to me?).

My post was in response to the poster querying whether the OP would really want her child to go to this school despite it being ‘full’ and ‘unable to meet need’.

What I was trying to get across, perhaps not very clearly, is that some schools will try it on despite the law being very clear. I know a school’s protestations about not being able to meet need are wholly irrelevant to school admissions outside of the process of naming a school in an EHC plan.

No, it wasn't aimed at you. There was another poster that suggested the school can use this reasoning to deny a place

and @Starlight987 I have also heard similar. Some very successful and high attaining schools will try and discourage people from taking up places. Story as old as time.

Sometimes their reluctance to take the child really does foreshadow the experience the child might get once in the school.

Sometimes though it is a management strategy and once you pierce the outer skin and get in (!) you find the actual SENDCo and teaching staff are good.

Plus, it’s just not very community-minded or representative to have a disproportionately low number of pupils with SEN support or EHC plans is it? Ofsted should be much, much tougher on this than it is at the moment.

@Lightuptheroom fair dos: we are singing from same score.

OP I hope you get your child’s place at the school. I’m truly sorry you have to spend energy sorting this. It shouldn’t be necessary. Kids with SEND should be adequately supported including in mainstream.

The first paragraph of pg 6 on this document states:

Notification of application

The school will contact you directly advising you, in writing within 10 school days from receipt of application whether or not you can be offered a place. A verbal offer or refusal is not a formal decision. (my emphasis)

@prh47bridge

The Admissions Code... does not say that the offer must be made in writing for it to be a valid offer.

Does the Admissions Code explicitly state that a verbal offer shall be treated in the same way as a written offer? Or is this a point yet to be adjudicated?

N.b., I am not disputing that the LA's subsequent email supports OP's position that the school believed that it had made an offer. I am simply wondering whether it has been established in the law that verbal offers are binding in this situation.

I wouldn't trust any documents produced by admission authorities such as this. Many of them mis-state the rules. Indeed, I've been in appeals where admission authorities have attempted to argue that the Admissions Code doesn't mean what it clearly says.

The Code requires admission authorities to notify parents of the outcome of their application in writing, but does not preclude offers being made verbally and is silent on the treatment of verbal offers. However, there is no need to adjudicate. If the Admissions Code specified that an offer is only valid if it is made in writing, that would be binding. Absent any such provision, an offer is valid regardless of whether it is made in writing, verbally or by smoke signal.

Update:

I received a call from the school’s headteacher today informing me that he was really sorry for the misunderstanding and that there is actually a place for my son if I still wish to take it. He said it had been a genuine mistake on their part and apologised for the confusion. He said it was good that I had sent an email from my side with a timeline otherwise he wouldn’t have been aware.

He’s arranged a meeting with me and the SENCo to go over everything properly. He said he wanted to be transparent and explained that the class my son would be joining has several children with special needs, and that there have been some issues with pushing and “soft punches,” although these are being dealt with.

He also mentioned that my son’s current school probably has more resources for SEN support than they do, but he still wants to meet to discuss things in detail.

Now I’m not really sure what to do whether he was just being open and honest or if he was trying to put me off taking the place. I’m planning to attend the meeting, but I’d really appreciate any thoughts or advice.

If you want the place take it. You know your son and what provision he currently has. He's not saying they can't meet his needs, he's simply saying they have other children with SEN in the same class. Think about why you applied for the place in the first place and why you were willing to appeal their decision. Its not about what they think and they are NOT ALLOWED to interview you or your son!

I think he has realised they have to take your DS but they are trying to put you off / make you aware of existing needs in the classroom.

That’s exacting how I am feeling, like they’ve made a mistake and realised they messed up and now trying to put me off but let’s see how the meeting goes

If they said they couldn’t meet need then I really don’t get why anyone would send him there.
If he’s thriving it’s probably at the expense of lots of the other children and the sanity of the class teacher.
Speaking as a teacher, who is so glad it’s half term, as I am totally on my knees from trying my heart out to meet the needs of multiple children with EHCPs that contradict each other, SEN plans and children who need them but don’t have them yet - and then lots of children who don’t have additional needs but are currently getting a shit education because there’s only one of me and more than 10 children in my class that need assistance with the simplest of tasks!
I never get to check that the other children understand, help them with a spelling they need, chat about the task etc as I am run ragged trying to just keep everyone in the room and vaguely on task.
Proper inclusion is EVERYONE getting what they need.
Currently In most classrooms, no one is!

I'm torn. On one hand, you absolutely have a right to the place. On the other hand, I was in that situation where a head teacher said to me: "Please don't send your DD here. If you need the evidence that she's autistic, you'll have it within about 3 weeks because she'll be in complete overload. I could throw 3 more adults into that class and it would still be awful. We just have so many children with SN who all have conflicting needs."

He shouldn't have said it. It broke all sorts of rules, I'm sure. But he was looking at my passive, silent child, and was acting in her best interests.

I actually don’t mind the honesty I’d rather they be upfront than take my son and not be able to support him properly. I’m just trying to work out if he was being genuine or trying to put me off a bit

Well, the head may be genuely contrite but “another school having more resources” is also a routine SEND bingo term. What the head may be alluding to is that the other school is more deprived and therefore gets more per pupil funding. I have known some heads of schools where as few as 5% of children are entitled to free school meals be quite vocally aggrieved at their lower per pupil funding, and basically imply that they don’t have the money for SEND provision as a result. The truth is that disadvantage needs more funding bevause it is associated with lower attainment, greater behavioural issues and higher incidence of SEND ;)

Alternatively and more charitably it could be that the head’s school is for some reason genuinely underfunded and/ or already has a disproportionate number of kids with SEND, and they are fed up with picking up after other schools that do half assed jobs with SEND kids.

100% agree with this - exactly what I was to put.

I would say yes he is trying to put you off. Without an EHCP they have no evidence that they can’t support your child and therefore they cannot say that they can’t.

honestly schools are on their knees. There is no money, and it has been made even harder to get an EHCP which would unlock a tiny bit of funding at least. So basically your child will be going into an environment with a lot of additional need, no money for more TAs. The Head is probably envisioning the teacher going off on stress leave… TAs leaving…

I work at a school that in the past has had a great reputation for SEN. So everyone has tried to move their SEN child there and now we have no funds for TAs. Teachers leaving left right and centre… it’s horrendous. And then you have Bridget Phillipson basically telling everyone to get on with it