School charge for damages

[AllotmentFairy]

Bit of a long one.
i have been told by my childs school that i am liable for the cost of a teachers pair of glasses.
My child is 6 a school refuser due to sensory issues, child finds the class noise unbearable which causes major disregulation (hitting out running away and throwing items like books and toys) child has ASD ADHD PDA and also has an EHCP and is currently attending a mainstream school until a specialist school is found. Mainstream school said they cannot meet the need of my child which is why were on the list for a specialist school.

My child went into school and another child was disregulated in the classroom so all the children were moved and went outside to play. my child and another ended up having a squabble over taking turns on the outdoor equipment resulting in them both scratching and pinching each other. The teacher stepped in.

According to my child (i dont know because i wasnt there) the teacher grabbed hold of the forarm and pulled my child away. My child then grabbed the teachers glasses as a retaliation and threw them over a fence resulting in them being bent. The teacher is very new and my childs 1:1 told me isnt experienced with SEND. Teacher had never met my child until this day and no other adult was present as a witness or to help. The teacher said my child punched her breaking her glasses and that my child didnt grab them from her face ( but the glasses were retrieved from over a 6ft fence).
I know the school have already stated that they cannot meet my childs needs in accordance with the EHCP but the school insist on my child being in school and the ehcp states we must continue at the mainstream school until a specialist school is available.

Now im faced with a bill. I feel i shouldnt pay it due to the fact that if my child had the usual 1:1 or any of the 3 other members of staff that are familiar to my child, this could have been prevented.
I totally understand that the 3 other teachers were helping regulate another child in need but my child Didnt have an appropriate member of staff that knew my childs needs and my child didnt have a familiar adult.
my childs EHCP says :
Provision 1:1 or Small group with a member of staff that the (child) has formed a relationship with. New members of staff should be introduced gradually with childs known adult until a relationship has formed.

Staff working with (child) must be trained and have a good understanding of childs retaliation, triggers and behaviours relating to child ASD ADHD PDA and a good understanding of SEMH.

If the same scenario happened with the usual 3 teachers or my childs 1:1 I would pay the bill, but i feel like im being billed for something out of my control due to the schools negligence.

Am I being unreasonable?

Thoughts??

I have no specialised legal knowledge, but this seems bonkers under any circumstances. The teacher should get the school insurance to pay. You should only be paying if you personally grabbed the teacher's glasses yourself! They didn't supervise your child properly. They are in loco parentis, so it is their failure.

I do not think you would be liable even with his usual 1:1s. In school, he is the school's responsibility.

The school can’t force you to pay. And it sounds like the teacher handled it poorly.

Although, the wording in the EHCP is poor. It needs to be detailed, specified and quantified, not vague and woolly. For example, is it 1:1 or small group? That might not be any 1:1. What is ‘small’? What ‘member of staff’ and ‘staff’ - what is their job title? ‘Trained’ in what? You should look to pursue amendments.

If the LA has finalised the EHCP without naming your preferred placement, have you appealed?

I have never heard of this before ever, a parent being asked to pay for damage.
The teacher should be in a union and have insurance cover as part of membership.

2x4greenbrick
I totally agree with your point about the amendments in the ehcp. I did point out all of those details and our ehcp coordinator did change some wording in provision but then without changing anything else completed the final copy.
We are up for review in January and I will be much more firm with regards to this. I have kept a diary solely for my child and have added comments to be able to get his ehcp and support correctly worded so my child actually benefits from having an ehcp. I feel this type of wording makes the ehcp not worth the paper its written on.
The ehcp states : LA maintained special school
However my child is to stay in current mainstream until a suitable special school is found. A tenure has been put out to all special schools locally we're awaiting to hear if any of those can meet need and have a place.

Start preparing for a review now. I would ask to bring the review meeting forward - although the LA may not agree. Amendments are rooted in evidence, so start collating that evidence. It isn’t enough for you to just say something is needed. You need evidence.

Following the AR, if the LA fails to amend the EHCP sufficiently, you should appeal B&F.

You should go back to the LA. It isn’t acceptable for them to name SS as type then say DS needs to continue to attend the current MS until a place is found. I get the impression the LA has said the schools are full? On its own, being ‘full’ is not enough of a reason to refuse to name your preferred placement. The LA has to prove the school is so full admitting DS is incompatible. The bar for this is higher than many LAs admit. It has to be something tangible and specific and is more than an “adverse effect”, “impact on” or “prejudicial to”. The LA can name a maintained SS (or other non-wholly independent SS) even if the school objects. Following the review, if they don’t name your preferred placement, appeal I as well as B&F.