Please or to access all these features

SN children

Here are some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on special needs.

FFS they are at it again

10 replies

insanityscratching · 20/01/2012 11:56

So after 9 months of repeated delays and disregard for the law LA backed down at the eleventh hour to avoid Judicial Review and placed J in the independent specialist school that I wanted.

J is thriving, it is undoubtedly the right place, he is making what might be considered small steps but is in fact huge progress in his ability to cope with life in the outside world.

I forgot to send his lunch yesterday, it would ordinarily have been considered a catastrophe causing huge trauma to J. Instead he alerted a TA and went with him to a shop to buy his own without a hiccup Grin

Yesterday on the deadline for the LA to respond to our appeal against parts 2 and 3 they decided instead to apply to have the appeal thrown out and offered an early Annual Review instead.

School have said they wouldn't be able to contribute to an AR because J hasn't been there long enough for them to make assessments etc

It is the anniversary of the last AR next week, it took 9 months for them to issue a proposed amended statement, J has been in school since November so has attended less than 50 days.

We have to appeal because the statement doesn't show evidence of need for J to be where he is nor any description of the support he needs and the LA will use that to get him out otherwise.

LA seem happy to spend more funds fighting against me than they do actually funding the placement J needs.

I'm sick and tired and stressed out by it all and the LA won't have to explain their conduct at all which infuriates me tbh.

OP posts:
StarlightMcKenzie · 20/01/2012 12:04

Can't you continue with JR for wasted funds, theirs and yours?

insanityscratching · 20/01/2012 12:09

I'm assuming that's what the solicitor is hinting at in her response Star. She's annoyed now because rather than giving grounds for it to be struck out they have insinuated solicitor hasn't responded by only sending their correspondence and not our responses.
I hope it does go back to JR as that's covered by legal aid Grin

OP posts:
c0rnsilllk · 20/01/2012 13:05

so are they wanting to take J out of the SS even though he's already a pupil there and amend the statement so that the school isn't named? How scary. Can they do that even though he's already enrolled?

StarlightMcKenzie · 20/01/2012 13:06

Good luck. Blimmin infuriating but I suppose that was the aim.

How parents are seriously expected to navigate this whole system without significant resources is beyond me.

appropriatelytrained · 20/01/2012 13:14

How disgraceful. It really is about time that children are allowed to get legal aid in their own name, not only for JR, but for all SEN Tribunal matters.

There is no access to justice here. They do whatever they want in the hope that you won't spend 1000s pursuing them.

Absolute low lifes.

insanityscratching · 20/01/2012 13:32

The SEN Tribunal system is supposed to be parent friendly, we're supposed to be able to navigate it without the need for expensive professionals but LA's have got wise I think and so use every underhand method in the book to force us to employ a solicitor at great personal expense.

I'll do whatever it takes before I'll back down so bring it on I say.

OP posts:
appropriatelytrained · 20/01/2012 13:52

We are behind you insanity - we really are. It's tough and stressful but you know you are in the right.

I think that was the purpose of the vexatious ban against me. I could navigate the SEN system myself as a lawyer but when they stopped me from corresponding with them, I had no choice but to get specialist legal advice and use a lawyer to pursue them.

Then the get the LGO to validate or cover up their illegality and force matters through the Tribunal system so you can't JR with legal aid in your child's name.

Disgraceful.

StarlightMcKenzie · 20/01/2012 14:06

And that is why they were involved in my DLA fraud accusations? And behind my being denied any respite so I had to pay myself for dd in order to spend the time with ds on his 1:1 work (despite fulfilling the criteria)?

StarlightMcKenzie · 20/01/2012 14:24

But how do they justify it? Why do they?

insanityscratching · 20/01/2012 14:38

Well they have nothing to fear if my experience of the LGO is anything to go by do they Star?

They won't have to explain themselves at Tribunal because if we eventually get there they'll not be interested in the time or the route it took to get there so they have got away with it.

They probably do it knowing that parents haven't got unlimited resources so if they drag it out long enough they'll buckle.

How much are we as parents supposed to be able to take? Even the solicitor is pissed off with them now.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page