Should transport be written into the statement

[StarlightWithAsteroid]

just that really. And, if it doesn't need to be, can it be?

Yes it can . Not sure which section it goes in but I asked my solicitor this very question last year. I'm at the point where I believe no promises that isn't backed up in writing, (and even I have my doubts).

that's exactly it Boch. I don't want it withdrawn randomly and then be forced to JR or summit with it gone until I've spent time and money ploughing through a system to reach someone vagualy competent. I want the rights and wrongs clearer.

Quite often it isn't, but the LA still have a duty to provide it for eligible children. That said if you can get it put in then I would!

dunno.

we bargained with the LA using transport,to get dd1's school place.

our solicitor said go ahead and claim it anyway, and when statement came through all the forms were there.

even when we declined (officially via forms), our case officer phoned up and urged us to take it

the rules (currently) are clear cut - over certain distance (from suitable school, and if it is named on the statement then it is thought to be a suitable school) = guaranteed transport, no ifs, no buts. that could change of course, but our solicitor didnt think it worth arguing the statement over, iyswim

The LA have a duty to provide access to a classroom, pencils and pens etc. Doesn't stop them filling up as much as they can of the statement with things the child woukd already get as a matter of course!

yes It should be written into the statement...
the section addressing safety, outdoors and ability to move around independently, coping ability, etc...the risks and whether running off is a factor, etc
When these risk's are identified... then it should be written into the statement and whether an escort and transport are needed
If it's not written in...then the provision is unlikely to be provided.

What the. I'm not sure that we would get it for that. DS has been attending that school without transport for some time now (although school not named in statement, let alone tranport). It is more because of the distance, having a new baby, and dd starting nursery in September (and my obviously not being able to be in two places at once) that has made it more important.

We're negotiating the school currently, and hope to get it, just not sure if/how tranport is going to work, but it would make a substantial difference to our family life if we don't have to get ds TO and FROM his school.

I would imagine then that your debate is with the provision's location from home and that as this is the best/only provision in meeting your DC's needs...that the authority will have to provide transport or costs of travel to and from...as part of meeting the needs.

If that is the case, then this is your argument with getting the transport provision written into statement, though I wonder about your chances if you have previously been providing this yourself....and if it isn't based on your DC's needs but rather convenience for you...(which may be their view iyswim)...I don't know enough on your situation/statement to see any definite's/needs which could define it for argument...sorry I'm not helping much...but it is doubtful you will get this transport if it's about time management for you....they may argue that you could use a nursery near the school to address this issue with a view to having both DC's at the same school later on (if that is an option?)

My DS has a taxi to and from school, but it's not written into his statement, so it is possible.

I'm not sure how secure that transport is now reading this thread. Maybe I should look to get it included at his review.

It's not a nursery nursery, but a state nursery iyswim as dd is 4 in Sept, but it is arguably not compulsory. DS' school is out of county and far from catchment so the chances of dd getting a state nursery placement near it are zero.

DS school takes me an hour and a half to get to by public transport with baby in buggy and dd (3) who would miss one and a half hours of her 3 hour nursery placement as she'd have to come with me. (believe me I have explored alternatives and there are reasons why there are none for her).

But, his school is the nearest appropriate placement. It is 4.5 miles away.

so you chose not to/or couldn't because of this situation attend nursery at 3yrs and have been having to do this travelling by bus (1.5hrs each way) with toddler and pregnant, twice a day since your DC started at the school?....omg!!!

Sounds like you have been badly let down and this should have been addressed much sooner and transport/escort should have been in place from the beginning......I'd be getting a bit stoppy and wanting this sorted out asap...phone the school and advise them it cannot be done by you and leave them to get it sorted out...schools are closed at the moment but are still staffed to a degree...failing that...whoever else you have involved in the decision/assessment process...phone them all and raise this for immediate attention....it lies with the Ed dept to fund costs and put it in place...good luck with it

more than that what, because ds at school full time means 1.5 hours there and back, and then, 1.5 hours there and then back again. 6 hours commuting days.

The school is not named in the statement, so it is until tribunal, our 'choice' to do this. We are hoping to settle, and I could really do without the 6 hours daily travelling.

And as for being let down, - do you know, since ds has attended that school as a family we are SO much better off than we ever have been. I had forgotten what it was like to be relaxed enough to enjoy my children, and my life. 6 hours or not, it is quality! Being let down, is everything that came before.

The school is an independent specialist. They won't see it as their responsibility to sort ds. I briefly mentioned to the HV that dd is at risk of missing a year of school but she went away and came back with the line 'not our problem as many parents have to cope with their children at two different schools'.

DS1 goes to an independent special school, out of borough, and I was concerned that his transport wasn't included in his statement, but was assured by our advocate (FS) that if the statement named the school then by definition the LA had accepted that that was the nearest suitable school for ds1 and as it was more than 3 miles away (8 miles) then transport was an automatic right.

She also said that personal circumstances absolutely ARE relevant. The fact that DD is at a primary close to our house and DS2 at nursery nearby meant that there would be no question at all that I would be expected to transport DS1 myself. Essentially I would not be penalised for the fact that there was no closer school that could meet DS1's needs. It is categorically not the same situation as someone who has NT children attending different schools

I know several people in borough K who have 'bargained' with the LA and agreed to cover transport themselves but a) all of them were happy to transport their children themselves b) were able to as they had no younger children and crucially, c) they may not be aware that the LA has no right to bargain in this way. If at any point they decide they want the LA to transport their child, the LA would have to provide that service, as long as the school meets the minimum distance requirements

Transport is written into ds's statement fundamentally because he's now post 16 and our LA are proposing that post sixteen transport should be funded by parents and all efforts should be made for the child to use public transport which for ds would be impossible and the cost would be about £100 per week if I had to transport him.
It's written in on the basis that to enable ds to gain the maximum benefit from his school day the transition from home to school and vice versa should be calm and predictable therefore ds needs a taxi with escort with whom he is familiar.
Ds's school recognise the importance of that transition and they are very militant in ensuring the taxi service meets their children's needs and the secretary keeps a close eye on any transgressions and forces the LA to keep them in line. Ds's taxi was getting in the habit of getting to school at home time at the last minute which increased ds's anxiety they were very quick to complain and taxi is there ten minutes before end of school.

If they name it, they are accepting that the school can meet ds's needs. Therefore, as it is more than 3 miles away, they are responsible for transport BUT they may well factor this into costs at Tribunal. What is their preferred school - local, mainstream and cheap? Or do they accept that specialist provision is needed?

They have agreed that they cannot meet ds' needs from within their own provision. They have not agreed that the school we want him to go to is appropriate. They have not proposed an alternative however, and I am not expecting them to as the school fees of our preferred out of county independent are not huge. However, transport 'could' change that.

But we need it, or at least, I have to find a way to find ds' commute not my job whilst I still can't drive (by car just 20mins in rush hour).

Statement can include transport needs, you should contact your Social Worker and your GP, the more professionals you can get to acknowledge that this is a requirement it will be better for you in the long-term. I would like to wish you all the luck which you will need and don't give up, at the end of the day - you're fighting for your child's needs.

Transport should be automatically provided for a child with a SSEN if without it he can not attend school. The transport is required to be non stressful. If he can not attend school due to not being able to get there, then there is an automatic protection against a criminal charge under s444 Education Act 1986. further more if he can not get there then the SSEN is not being provided and there is a claim for Judicial Review under s325[5] Education Act 1996. It is likely that the child would get that funding in his own name rather than the parents name.

If the child attends the parental preferred school as opposed to the LA preferred school you would need to prove why the parental school was the only appropriate school capable of meeting needs. If you can do that then the LA school falls away. That is why this point is a key issue before Tribunal and is often a negotiating point with LAs. Parents generally are very keen on doing this which generally puzzles me as if the case for the school is strong then the Tribunal would order the school anyway and in so doing the parents have increased their costs.

Yeah, I know of a few parents who have volunteered to pay transport costs if they can have their choice of school, but if the LA acknowledge they can't provide for his needs and haven't got an option of their own to offer, Tribunal will presumably name your choice and the LA will have to pay transport too. When is Tribunal.

. should be a ? !

I understood transport should be provided for statemented children (5 -16) having to travel if their nearest 'suitable' placement is greater than 2miles for the under 8s, 3 miles in the over 8s. Things are changing so getting it written into the statement would be wise. Our county will not pay if the parents 'choose' a further 'suitable' placement. their definition of 'suitable' is very broad and basic. So if their is a nearer school in the same classification (even if we all know it would be totally wrong for the childs needs) then they say they will not pay for transport even if it is on the statement. So I guess you may need to prove their is no nearer 'suitable' placement within their definition. I have no idea if independant schooling changes the rules but know of children in specialist independant schools out of county who get transport provided - even in this county. Good luck! I hope you get transport as it makes life so much easier.

Thank you all. Very much appreciated. I know the law but I also know how little LAs can pay attention to it.

We are however, getting somewhere sensible with negotiations so I 'think' it will be alright, although I cannot post the details atm obviously.

It's my birthday today - yay!

Happy birthday torchlight!

magso - if there is a SSEN then the distance is irrelevant. It is based on what is necessary for the child as an individual. If the LA has a general policy not to provide then that policy is likely to be illegal.