ECHP REFUSAL TO ASSESS

[ButterCup1111]

Hi
We took the LA to a tribunal for failure assess for an ECHP for my asd child. The tribunal agreed with the LA.
Within the tribunal outcome document, the tribunal referred my child to a he instead of a she within the first part of letter. Does anyone think this mistake would be classed as an error of law?

I'm in no way an expert at this.
But as a lay person, I can't see how that could be an error of law.
How old is your DC?
Presumably you can ask again in a year when issues might be more visible?

Hi my child is 10. She masks at school and is academically bright has alot of anxiety with attending school. The tribunal only considered what the SENCO had put and dismissed the paediatric report which recommends an ECHP.

You are extremely unlikely to be given permission to appeal to

the Upper Tribunal based on the information in your posts. Did you have any other independent reports - SALT, OT, EP, psychiatrist…? Was the paed report tribunal standard or a standard NHS letter from someone not experienced with writing Tribunal standard reports? What reasons were given?

Hi the letter was a paediatric report from the paediatrician it stated for the school to trigger as ECHP. It appears the tribunal only took the evidence of her academic ability and not any of the faults, ie struggling with school refusal. She now has a referral for anxiety to the Local mental health support team. I'm not sure if new evidence can be submitted, but the Senco has gone from going against us, to referring her to the mental health support. They say you can only appeal if there is an error in law, but surely writing the wrong sex on the tribunal outcome could be considered as an error?

Provided the tribunal were considering the right child, and followed the law, then a typo in the ruling swapping sex isn't a law error surely?
A law error would be ignoring rules as to who gets an ehcp, or not running the tribunal correctly.

If the paediatrician thought an EHCNA was necessary they could have applied rather than pass the buck. It is unlikely the paed letter was Tribunal standard, or anywhere near. Sadly, many paediatricians do not understand the SEN system.

The wrong sex in the letter is an error but not an error of law. Have you read IPSEA and SOSSEN’S information about this?

It is unlikely SENDIST only considered academic ability. It is more likely they did consider other areas of development but concluded there wasn’t the evidence to meet the threshold for assessment, especially if you didn’t have an other evidence other than the paed letter, which isn’t an error of law.

If DD cannot attend school full time the LA should be making alternative arrangements via s.19 of the Education Act 1996.

Your best bet is securing further Tribunal standard evidence and reapplying.

Thank you. That does make sense. I didn't realise the paediatrician had the authority to trigger an ECHP. I really appreciate the advice. 😊

Not authority to issue an EHCP, but to request an EHCNA just the same as parents and schools.

I thought the threshold for assessment was that your child ‘might’ have SEN. Where do you find out how to get hold of tribunal standard reports? Is it best to instruct a specialist solicitor? Thanks.

The threshold for an EHCNA is a) has or may have SEN, and b) may need SEN provision to be made via an EHCP. Having or maybe having SEN is only part of the test.

For suggestions of professionals to use for Tribunal standard reports ask around locally, in support groups, on MN etc. IPSEA and SOSSEN can sometimes suggest people. Parents in Needs can also sometimes help suggest and fund assessments. If you use a solicitor they may have suggestions.

A solicitor isn’t essential, but if you do instruct one ensure they are a SEND specialist and have experience of SENDIST. Check whether you are eligible for Legal Aid too.