Tribunal: how close did you get to a breakdown?

[mariamariam]

Approaching deadline to appeal 'failure to assess'. Namechanged now for obvious reasons, but still recognisable to regulars. The charities have given good advice but say they wont be offering more than that since we seem to know what we're doing and they need to concentrate on parents who havent a clue (i paraphrase)

School will be opposing the application (partly genuine difference of opinion, partly sheer ignorance, partly because in cahoots with the LEA) so i need ro make sure the case is spot on. And i have s tendsncy to obscess and waste hours in projects like this, but we can't afford an advocate. Definitely cant afford a solicitor/ barrister.

My main fear though, is that I can't personally afford a breakdown as 1. my job wd probably not be there on recovery; 2. the dc would lose more than we'd gain in getting DS an adequate education; 3. Ds1 really won't get a workable education without a statement.

Advice please!!!

Oh God!

I know your stories but being reminded here makes me shake with anger.

I know now that I should and could have challenged our last tribunal decision on the basis or irrationality, not to mention not reading ny of the bloody evidence. The advice and reasons not to, to be fair, were not because anyone thought the hearing had been fair but because it woukdn't be the fastest path to an improved outcome for Ds. I didn't know then that the LA woukd continue to wave their evil wand and thought stupidly they'd use their awareness of how close they were to losing to treat us better.

I laugh at my naivity now. With it as it was then I may well not have won when challenging, so I'm sensible enough to look to the future rather than past.

The LA have spent more than we ever asked on continuing their evil though. I take some satisfaction from knowing that the evil public sector workers at the level of seniority required to deal with us are old enough to have been shafted by the pension thing without the time to compensate.

It is a small comfort, but comforting it is.

Also with AE that complaining to LGO increased my feelings of injustice and exasperation. I certainly didn't and still don't feel that the LGO is a means of recourse when you have been treated shoddily by the LA and in hindsight I wish I'd never wasted my time tbh.

But insanity. In an injust system it was still the right thing to do. The 'official' outcome might look like nothing gained, but I refuse to believe that everyone in the system is evil.

It may have been the right thing to do but it added to the stress and frustration and it felt and still feels tbh like adding insult to injury.The LA's motivation was money and I can see that even though as a motive I think it's morally reprehensible. What I can't see is the LGO's motives, what is in it for them?

That's a very interesting point.

I think it comes down to the working culture of these people.

No-one in evil LA believes they are evil. They believe in whatever they need to to justify their stance. Usually, it is that parents who don't respect their 'professionalism' and challenge them are themselves evil.

I suspect the LGO has some kind of target to meet wrt not finding LAs guilty. I also suspect they are from the same stock as the LA employees who have been trained to believe that unhappy parents are resource-vampires.

But if they have a target then the whole basis for their existence is a farce isn't it? Supposedly their mission statement is " to investigate complaints in a fair and independent way - we do not take sides" surely to meet that they shouldn't be ex LA staff and each and every case should be investigated by someone with a sound knowledge of the procedures involved unlike in my experience where they had no knowledge of transition reviews or deadlines and without a hidden agenda.

I don't believe our LA are evil they are undoubtedly incompetent though. Even our solicitor (Maxwell Gillott) said she had never experienced anything like it before from any LA as they seemed oblivious as to what the procedures were even on bread and butter stuff like issuing an amended statement with a school named in part four and a signature so in actual fact a final statement which they then called a proposed amended statement

I had an unsigned Final proposed amended statement too .

Tribunal accepted an appeal on it though.

I still find it hard to accept that people pretended to "care" more about my own child than I do, and to use that as an excuse to justify their lies, some of which were truly wicked. "Group-think" prevents some professionals from ever having to face a mirror.

As an adult you accept that life isn't fair and deal, but the urge to protect your child is primeaval, & the utter helplessness you encounter, when it's brought home to you that actually you can't is a feeling that lives with you forever.

I will say though - Tribunal win is a minor stage in a LONG game. Preserve your energy as-

You gotta win a statement
Make sure it's worth the paper it's written on
Make sure it is actually implemented (insert hollow laughter)
Work out a way to ensure you get a TA who can do what's needed (cackle)
Ensure that any support is not whipped away at the next annual review
Watch your back

Deliver any therapy that even a tribunal can't win you, cope with the day to day banalities of your child's disability such as getting up 3 times a night, and maintain some semblance of a decent quality of family life.

My Gran used to tell me "sometimes the greatest strength is simply to endure" - she was right. Don't let any stage of the war drain all your energy as the next battle is ALWAYS just around the corner!

If you crack these barstards win! If that's not incentive to stay sane I dunno what is!

And of course only our LA would think that a named person with only a rudimentary grasp of English is a good idea too At one point I was thinking of using my school standard Spanish in emails as I felt my knowledge of Spanish was probably better than her knowledge of English tbh.

Interestingly, I've never had to lie. The truth has been quite shocking enough. Unfortunately I suspect it is then not believed!

I only lie I tell is to say that I'm "fine", when I'm not. They've violated enough of my space - they don't get to violate my personal feelings too.

It is really distressing how awful the experience of going to tribunal can be. My anxiety levels are high normally dealing with my two DS's and their needs but am seriously doubting I am strong enough to deal with tribunal.

AE - I hope you now move it to Stage 3. That's where your complaint will be considered by a Panel of Councillors and you have the right to appear in person to make your case (that's how it works in my LA). Of course the Councillors found no wrong but their decision was eventually overturned by the LGO.

My biggest complaint is with schools. There are too many working within schools that have no understanding of SENs or how to identify and support children who have SENs. If we can read the SEN COP why can't they? Some of the simplest remedies seem to be left untried. They cannot write a SMART IEP to save their lives. Not all these things cost additional money. It's when needs get ignored over a long period of time that the real cost emerges, trying to rectify the neglect of schools. I reckon that DS has now cost them (all Agencies) the best part of approaching £1/2 million since he needs finally started to be met. they could have saved a firtune by identifying his difficulties in early years and providing specific support then.
So more must be done to educate teachers - to get them to understand that some children have complex hidden disabilities and their job is to find a way of supporting these children - not writing them off as 'naughty' or excluding them. Basic SEN training for SENCOs would help.

LAs are cash-strapped. They have a budget from which all needs must be met. I can therefore understand (but not condone) why the fight so hard to save themselves expensive support. If everyone got the support they truly deserved our Council Tax bills would be through the roof! So they do there damndest to avoid expenditure. Lying, neglecting, misadvising, procrastinating, etc - all to save money. My professional integrity would not permit me to work in a job like that.
So, is the solution to throw more money at SEN support - raise Council Tax, increase direct to LAs from central Govt (when the current trend is in the oposite direction?). Will the fact that Academies can refuse to admit those with SENs mean the few LA-maintained schools become dumping grounds for all the 'difficult cases' that other schools can reject?

The LGO is a disgrace. It's staffed primarily by ex-LA employees. For a supposedly independent watchdog it's a joke. But it serves its purpose of providing a futile means for people to vent very effectively, without costing the LAs very much in compensation. I doubt if anyone will ever reform it as its ineffectualness is actually very effective for cash-strapped LAs.

SENDIST is also a disgrace. It should be very easy for parents to represent themselves without having to feel they must armour up with legal representatives to counter the LAs own Heavy Brigade. If you're going to have Tribunals as a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution then they need to be accessible to the lay person - which they are not. The problem is that no one looks at the evidence sensibly and arrives at a sensible outcome. Allowing the LA's legal reps to philibuster until the short amount of hearing time is used up is frankly ridiculous. There should be a set format with set time limits, no legal reps and then Tribunal issue their decison the same day.
In fact the incompetence of Tribunals is even more unforgiveable as their members shouldn't have a vested interest in the LA winning the case - yet too many decisions go in favour of the LA. What's going on here? I can only guess that Tribunals too have their eye on the bottom line and the effect that the cost of providing proper support would impose on LAs.

So the system is rotten from the schools right through to the appeals authority.

But the way things are going I fear there may come a day when we look back fondly on these corrupt bodies.

^^ Sorry - I must learn to use spell-checker and check my grammar

I totally agree with Wet re not all support solutions costing money. Simple things such as a copy of my son's time table to stick on the fridge door were refused at his last school. That's the cost of a 10p photocopy ffs! I have a 1:1 TA who finds the concept of an observation beyond him & a home school book far too much effort yet has been accepted for teacher training .

SMART targets seem to be possible in EVERY industry except education, where the inability to write them is down to culture NOT ignorance. (I've seen smart targets used for performance management of coffee shop staff who barely speak English ffs!)

As I see it the SEN industry is bloated with parasites at every level, public & private sector, due to a refusal to embrace any semblance of accountability or measurability.

There were 5 LA bods on the LA side at my Tribunal. On my side was just this stubborn & determined Mum.

One thing that did irritate me at Tribunal was that by watching the clock I was able to establish that the LA side were given up to 45 mins "air time" on several points, whereas I was restricted to less than 5. That didn't seem fair & so I would advise others to make like a politician and have "soundbite" key points that can be further explained if you get the chance. Also look up "elevator speech" on a business comms site as a technique for keeping your restricted airtime as packed with hard hitting points as possible.

SENDIST is a system weighted in the balance of LA's at every stage. It's not even accessible to every parent on cost grounds alone, (expert reports cost a fortune!) The LGO is a joke as far as I can tell - a mere distraction or red herring to divert parental energies. Judicial Review is beyond the reach of most people so irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

The UK still has an appallingly low functional literacy & numeracy rate if you consider our children are in compulsory education for a minimum of 11 years. Even amongst statemented children, most should be able to achieve some level of independence. This is a key goal in other, much poorer countries with far fewer "resources", yet doesn't seem to be a concern in the UK at all, possibly due to the welfare state? Home education rates for ALL ability levels have soared in the last decade.

The system is truly corrupt at EVERY level, & I can see why Moondog places such hope in the concept of free school, though the academies set me on another rant if I'm not careful. The current coalition government seems to tear down what ineffective protections there are for our kids. We need a revolution!!!!!

I'd like to see EP's made truly independant of LA control as a first step to fairness in the process. The inherent conflict of interest in their current role as employees of LA's hobbles many children at the very first stage.

Wet - stage 3? There are no stages to complaints with Shitshire Council. They refuse to deal with you then tell you you are vexatious and must go to the Ombudsman for redress - end of.

The annoying thing for me about the LGO is that each time I have pushed vigorously back against their judgments which make no sense in law or on the facts, they move their position. They have now conceded maladminsitration on one part of the claim - a year and three provisional views later. That is simply disgraceful. This was not based on new facts but on making it clear I would not go away.

They also draw ridiculous conclusions without evidence so they will say we have concluded that Shitshire did their best and there is nothing else any other Council could have done. So you say, do tell me, exactly what did Shitshire do? Can't answer that one.

Finding for LGOs is their default position in SEN matters. Yet, they were much more robust in my brother's case in terms of his social care package being cut.

I am gobsmacked by the crapness of Tribunals too. Our chair is a lawyer for god's sake but his ruling was something a trainee paralegal would be admonished for. Slapdash, not understanding the basic procedure and unquestioning of LAs.

I wish there was a way of exposing these issues but no one is interested.

I am not taking on Shitshire because, having taken the pathfinder money, they decide they can't be arsed implementing direct payments irrespective of the system the Direct Payment Order requires. Shit beyond belief but it is the reprehensible behaviour on a personal level of staff which is unacceptable.

I found out all sorts of crap being circulated about me (via getting hold of the LGO's file). The LGO say I will have to start a new complaint to get them to look at that - yet who do I complain to? The email was circulated amongst the complaints team???

That should say I am now rather than I am not.

Star, you posted earlier on the HRA. I think the issue with SEN is the Equality Act and this can be seen under the broader human rights framework.

I think the SEN process needs to be enhanced by reading in equality commitments and broader non-dsicrimination duties.

For example, there is actually a government document called 'the human rights framework as a tool for regulators' aimed at Ombudsmen etc. It makes explicit reference to promoting and enhancing the rights of persons with disabilities and setting standards for bodies in jurisdiction to aim at.

Do you think this is read by caseworkers? I doubt it. I am dealing with an Ass Ombudsman but I doubt very much that she understands what this means in terms of her day to day practice.

So, you would not need an explicit application under the HRA, but you can use HRA rights (particularly Article 8 I think with children as this considers the need for full amenity and participation) and the Equality Act to interpret statutory standards.