Amazing S&LT - they always let us down!

[appropriatelytrained]

Wow what a day for crappy services. I heard from the LGO and S&LT today. It's interesting that they all know I am about to depart to London for two weeks with DS who is at Gt Ormond St. Great timing!

Anyway, crappy S&LT! I asked them in July to provide details of a meeting they had had without our knowledge with school in which they'd all clearly stitched up DS's fake S&LT programme in preparation for Tribunal.

S&LT ignore me. PALS ignore me.

I complain to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman about S&LT and PALS. Trust agrees in Oct to relase documents and hold a meeting.

One month later, I've heard nothing so chase Ombudsman. I'm offered a meeting but no notes.

A further month goes by. I'm offered a date for a meeting but no notes. I chase the notes. What was it you wanted says PALS? Yes PALS who are being complained about are handling the complaint

23rd December late in the afternoon, I get an email with a letter from Head of Children's services saying - there are no records. Meeting was just to discuss Tribunal process. No therapeutic outcome. No records. Oh and why do you want a meeting?

I write back and say - this meeting clearly produced evidence about my son's programme. Evidence which you knew we disputed. Evidence which was so important that a principal therapist (who wasn't dealing with DS but who attended the meeting) and reported back to her head of dept.

Today - my son's records for the last part of June/July appear. They refer to the meeting and who was there and what it was about. A partial recollection given what I already know about it. But there is indeed a record of the meeting.

Bloody liars.

Interestingly. There are pages of scribbled notes, all in the same hand which looks like they've suddenly been dashed off.

Oh and, DS's last pragmatics test - just before Tribunal - with altered scores. Yes, altered scores. So that they are all increased!

I kid you not. I have written to the Chief Exec and demanded an investigation into these practices.

I won't hold my breath.

Hi AT

It's surreal isn't it.

The Chief Exec will almost certainly send you an acknowledgement telling you he's asked the Head of Children's Services to investigate your complaint.

So yet again you'll have the people you're complaining about jsutifying their own action.

That's what happened to my complaints too.

I broke through that cosy relationship by involving my Local Councillor and complaining to hom that my complaint was not being given a fair hearing.

The complaint was then given to another Dept to investigate. they found no case to answer - I exhausted all 3 stages of the Council's own complaints procedure being turned down at each stage before I took it to the Ombudsman who upheld my complaint [Bastard council]

I would go by this rule
For failures in Health matters - complain to MP
For failure in education matters - complain to Local Councillor
For failures in Ombudsman practise - complain to MP

But to get your complaint upheld you really need to prove that damage resulted from their wrong action / inaction. That's the only ones they take remotely seriously. A failure in due process alone seems to be insufficient.

It's not until you experience this deviousness, obsfuscation and prevarication first hand that you realise the extent to which public bodies are prepared to lie to you and colllude with each other.

Keep the diary - keep the evidence and when DS reaches 16 - get him legal aid to sue the fuckwits.

That's what I did.

At least we have each other eh!

Thank God - thank GOD I moved schools. Our head will not lie about this sort of stuff. He just won't.

The LA hate him already.

You'll find he will be 'moved on' soon.

They do that to the helpful ones

Don't even know what to say. Just reading that is exhausting, - but sadly believable.

But wanted to post to acknowledge has been read iyswim.

Thanks Star!

Wet - he is not in their county!

Beautiful!!!

He can give your LA mega-grief with impunity.

I like this guy.

Shall we nominate him for an MBE

Our SALT complaint similar story. Claimed all pre tribunal meetings were not about tribunal at all but because we were arguing for specialist placement on basis SALT inadequate and LA were just 'investigating our complaint'.
Said under info sharing rules SALT were allowed to share anything they want with SEN officer.
Complaint response (obviously drafted by SALT Manager who investigated herself) then launched into a major attack on us and ABA which makes it clear not only did SALT support the LA in tribunal but they basically wrote much of the defence to our appeal because the wording in the complaint response is almost word for word what the LA defence said! Foolish idiots.
Interesting though. Didn't expect them to concede much about their service but ended up inadvertently showing they were as much in it as the LA. We clearly underestimated SALT, all the time we thought the LA had put pressure on them, it didn't actually occur to us they had instigated much of it themselves.

Another betrayal then

Same for us. LA SALT was vicious in tribunal which was a shock. LA bods simply hid behind her.

I agree about the vicious S&LTs.

In our case, because there is a service level agreement, the LA told us they didn't have to pay anything additional for the S&LT because the contract required the S&LT to do all their work. However, the S&LT clearly think that because they bid on a the basis of a 'collaborative indirect model', they will fight tooth and nail against anything more than this.

The cheeky shits were meeting and stitching up what they were going to say in Tribunal against us. How can that be brought within the terms of a vague consent to sharing information for our child's benefit?

Basic rule of thumb: would the parents think it is for their child's benefit?

Wet - I agree. This head needs to be crowned King of something!

I had an hour long chat with him the other day while waiting for DS about the state of education and SEN generally. All his provision is teacher led and he makes sure that those with greatest need get the best possible support.

He is amazing and school feels like a sanctuary. DS came out today saying 'well that was fun' and he had done PE!!!

AT - can you clone him please?

Not surprised at all.

God, you know I look at the Leveson inquiry and all that phone hacking and I think how those lying bastards almost got away with everything. What stopped them? Rich victims with very deep pockets being able to bankroll a civil case.

What could we do to all these sods if we had lots of money? You could judicially review poor practices for a start, including the abject failure of the piss poor oversight mechanisms.

So could we GET loads of money?

Anyone know any rich benefactors? Independent minded, wealthy types?

You need a decision taken against public law principles by an LA or LGO in circumstances where a person has no other avenue of redress.

A good case would make good law and we have plenty of cases!

We'd need a credible lawyer/legal firm to help sell it otherwise our stories just sound insane.

I don't think there would be any problem getting lawyers to confirm how badly people have been treated and how people could challenge cases if they had the funding!

Do you think that these 'Independent professional organisations' that are popping up (as a response to the SEN Green Paper and personalised budget thingy) would fund relevant ones to them as a business strategy?

Not sure. I don't know much about them.

Would definitely try ICO. My complaint isn't even personal tbh just that LA lied on a FOI response and when I called them on it they admitted an error and gave me a partial response but not the information I wanted (relating to post 16 SEN) I informed ICO that not only had they disregarded deadlines and lied they were still withholding information that they held and I was entitled to see and I suspected the reason for this was that it would be confirmation that the LA had no regard for the law.
Have had a swift response, investigating officer doesn't appear to need spoon feeding every step of the way and seems interested.
Whether anything will come of it who knows? But it's keeping the LA occupied and amusing me at the same time

On second thoughts it probably isn't a good idea as independent are seen as 'commercial' and as such 'evil' in public sector minds.

I got a memo though a tip off from the HT of ds' school (that he hasn't ever attended) that they do not support ABA and if the tribunal decided that he needed it then we would have to find another school.

Now this is a blanket policy and against their admissions code but what is worse is that this memo was to the Chair of Governors who is actually the Head of Admissions of another Authority and she didn't explain that this was illegal.

Even worse, the memo summarises that the County solicitor had advised that no school in the LA would support or agree to it, indicating an illegal blanket policy held by the LA.

But what can I do? My solicitor isn't interested because this is pretty insignificant and mild in the world of bad practice engaged in by LAs and they know that the regulatory bodies would simply shrug.