Tribunal win makes the news

[EllenJanesthickerknickers]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-22663448

Saw this story on the BBC news website. Surprised it made the news. Wonder if they're MNers?

Lougle- this is what puts me off going back to private practice. I would want to do this stuff for
nothing for people but wouldn't be allowed.

Maybe the lawyers I'm involved with for the data sharing should think of setting up a pro Bono education service!!

Irwin Mitchell have promised me a list of pro Bono services for the blog!

I just feel there are alot of parasites around. In practice I did my own advocacy - I'm a lawyer why would I need a barrister unless I had to use one because of the court and curtailed rights of audience?

There's precious little pride observable in this field of the profession.

Why wouldn't you be allowed to do if for free?

I mean, obviously you'd have to cover costs and presumably a salary of sorts, but could you not do it 50% full fees, 30% free and 20% challenging the system and lobbying?

My issue would always be however, giving parents legal advice for free but insisting that they had to spend a considerable amount on independent reports as Indi EPs etc. aren't likely to do anything for free.

SEN law, as far as I can tell is not especially complicated. What makes it complicated is that it isn't adhered to by LAs and subsequently tribunals. And there are too many people making a mint from this fact. I didn't hire a solicitor to help me apply the law, I hired one to protect me from the other side breaking the law and the tribunal allowing it.

But even still, it was ME that pointed out to my solicitors why various practices were unacceptable in the run up to the tribunal, and who had to insist to my legal team that they are not dragged into telephone hearing after telephone hearing to address issues that could have been done simply by the LA phoning me and asking me something.

IE, what about a skill-mix model where you keep costs down by employing other system-savvy SEN parents as paralegal-type assistants?

And an independent specialist SEN teacher (cheaper than EPs etc) can do classroom obs and administer many of the standardised assessments etc.

There's BIBIC for assessments, and Family Fund for SLt /OT /physio vouchers. And sending off for NHS and LA files gets you the full data (including centiles) on assessment results etc. Some CAMHS (Maudsley and Great Ormond Street, according to posters here) are very good at supporting parents seeking appropriate education provision. And lots of special schools will spend hours to back parents up, right through from the initial phone call to the arrival of the dc for their first day.

I know you'll have seen this, but it's astonishing how many people do win SEND cases with minimal external support. Even when the parents are in difficulties or (eg) are badly educated they often win. Perhaps because the LA decisions are often so poor that no external body could even consider upholding them?

i represented myself and won - it was very very hard work and i do have a legal background. we simply could not afford legal representation after the cost of the reports. i think i was one of those cases that the decisions made by the LA were so poor that we were always going to win. however it was incredibly absorbing draining etc - i dont work so i had the time to do it which a lot of other parents wouldnt have so could spend time researching and asking questions on forums etc. its a rubbish system all around. i too felt i need to do a law degree post tribunal so i could help other parents but now am having second thoughts as i would want to do it for free but know i would be too emotionally involved as i know what parents go through so not sure now what to do - may get the law degree regardless for me then decide later which path to take.

also the la hired a barrister and a solicitor and i have to say both were pretty rubbish and didnt themselves seem to have a good understanding of sen law unless that was part of the game as well. at the actual tribunal they were pretty weak. what worries me now is the new EHCP coming in and how LA are likely now to muddy the waters with parents and parents really not understanding what the new rules mean

From what I've heard, the solicitors' firm in this case charges a lot more than most, and doesn't have a better track record.

We did most of it ourselves. I used to be a lawyer. I still found it tough actually sen law is conducted in a vicious way against parents I have not come across in any other area of law. Civil courts would not tolerate parties being threatening and personally abusive to each other. We used an advocate to check the appeal we drafted and for the day of the tribunal as the LA tactic was to make up lies about me to rubbish our views so I did not want to be in the situation where I had to deal with that

We did most of it ourselves. I used to be a lawyer. I still found it tough actually sen law is conducted in a vicious way against parents I have not come across in any other area of law. Civil courts would not tolerate parties being threatening and personally abusive to each other. We used an advocate to check the appeal we drafted and for the day of the tribunal as the LA tactic was to make up lies about me to rubbish our views so I did not want to be in the situation where I had to deal with that on the day or get cross which would have played into their hands. Our LA used such dodgy tactics I was also worried they would offer a new placement on the day and wasn't sure what to do if that happened. Our tribunal got adjourned ( tribunal cock up) which meant double costs thankfully our advocate and ABA team waived their costs for the wasted day or we would have been stuffed. Even doing it 90% ourselves we spent £5000 and it could have been more. We had a bundle 2 lever arches thick which was a fraction of the paperwork we had. Legal aid for good solicitors plus cost awards would in many cases lead to earlier settlement. In civil cases few cases go to a hearing. Our LA had no evidence for mainstream their own EP said ABA or SS. They still forced us to tribunal knowing if they made it as horrific as poss there was a good chance parents would give in or run out of money. I know of families who could not afford reports where tribunal said it could not award residential without a report rec it and parents could not get a report. If LAs had to pay costs and parents protected by legal aid then LAs would soon start to change tactics and only take cases where genuine difference of opinion / dispute to tribunal. Now they just use it as a delay / filter knowing many parents will drop out and not caring the children are missing out.

Oops dodgy phone posted twice

thats what happened to me agnes - as the LA first witness gave evidence she changed the offer of placement that the LA wanted. caught us completely unaware. i was furious as before the hearing itself had got started i had sat in the room with the LA and their barrister discussing the working document and at no point did they say a word until the tribunal started. thankfully the tribunal saw staright through it and grilled the LA EP about how this had happened and he refused to answer the question. i think also it was partly done to rile me but i kept a calm head after listening to all the advice on here . i didnt not rise to it which was very hard to do. my LA had no evidence whatsoever so were screwed but again probably decided to take the risk that they could possibly win it. its such a horrible system but i am more worried about whats going to happen post sept 2014. yes we all know the current system is rubbish and we expect the games etc but post sept 2014 none of us know what is going happen and i predict more tribunal cases not less

There should be a screening process at the appeal stage. If the statement doesn't contain quantified and specified provision particularly around TA hours, and SALT is in part 5 then the LA should be given 14 days to rectify this BEFORE the hearing otherwise barred.

The raising of a new placement anything less than one month before the hearing should also render the LA barred. They have ample opportunity to sort that kind of detail. It shouldn't take a tribunal to make them do their job and fully investigate the options.

Then less cases would come to tribunal and parents would incur less expense. Compulsory mediation is not what is needed before the tribunal, just some bod wot can spot an illegal statement is so that the expensive day isn't spent doing the basics.

I think there has been an increase in using case management powers judges have before hearings. But they could do a lot more to bar non existent cases from going to a hearing. So many LAs treat it as a day out and pursue a weak case on chance get duff panel or parent that crumbles.
Good lawyers would negotiate early by phone or round table meeting. You don't usually need a mediator. There has to be a financial penalty for delaying a placement that's obviously needed, at the moment there is a financial incentive.

I heard that solicitors sometimes instruct barristers because it actually works out cheaper that way. If they charge, say, £220 an hour and spend a day preparing for the hearing and a day doing it (including travel and preliminary discussions) then it's going to come to around £3000, whereas there are some good barristers around who charge £2000 or less. Also there's some benefit in someone getting a fresh look at everything who may spot any problems before they come up during the hearing.

This is the school that we wanted and the boy seems to have very similar needs to our ds. This story does give me hope that we may get there in the end. We have "only" been fighting for 8 months so far but have spent £6000 and like people have said it is not fair that you can only fight for your child if you have the money to do so. since we lost at tribunal ds is refusing to go to school. Just waiting for appeal now. We cannot afford to spend much more, just hope we get there before the money runs out.

But LAs and other gov bods will see this 'win' simply as the wealthy nabbing all of the resources at the expense of those who 'really' need it.

Star - I know your post is said tongue-in-cheek but I would love to know who these mythical children are who 'really' need it. My DS is in the bottom 0.3 percentile for his age and 4 years behind his peers (reading & writing) and still my LA have produced an illegally finalised Statement with totally non-existent provision for my son's severe dyslexia.

I think the definition of 'really' needing it to these people is those who don't argue with poor practice and bow gratefully to those who are doing the best they can in a system they have become unchallenging 'native' of.

native IN.

Tiny Tim, maybe? Or the modern deserving cripple?

When we decided we needed the help of a solicitor, as we were looking at a tribunal against a decision not to assess, we went to various law firms. Their costs were very similar. I'm not surprised by the figures quoted above.

However, while most law firms we contacted would only have a very junior person talk to you about your case before the timers started and bills came in, and some didn't even call back after multiple messages, SEN legal had their most senior lawyer call us and she gave us an hour of her time to go through all the details. We didn't have to pay a penny for this. After hearing what they had to say, they seemed like the best option. Admittedly they're not cheap, but to date things have gone as predicted and we've had no nasty surprises financially (that nasty surprise happened before we signed any agreement with them or any other lawyer).

The bills do add up, and it isn't fair. Much of this is down to the shocking behaviour of the local authorities, who do not follow the SEN Code of Practice, are not offering the support that these children are legally entitled to, are so under staffed they they're shoddy to say the least. And, what is this down to... Well our current government isn't helping with it's cuts that simply seem to target the most vulnerable.

They system is totally wrong. It is completely unfair that only those with resources are able to pay for legal support that all of us in this boat are entitled to. Legal aid should be available, and tribunals should be able to award costs. The whole system sucks.

I couldn't get past SEN Legal Secretary without submitting a £300 cheque. Someone from their firm came on MN about a year ago and confirmed this is what they usually do. If you insist on speaking to a solicitor beforehand the Secretary promises to get back to you and subsequently does with the message that they don't think the solicitor can take your case.

It's a way of filtering out the frugal, more vulnerable and ensuring their winning stats stay high by only selecting parents who will also be able to afford tribunal-savvy witnesses I guess. They can be selective because there is so much demand due to LAs not doing the basics such as q&s and Part 3 SALT.

Gosh, that's not my experience of them at all. I got a telephone appointment with the principal lawyer within days of me contacting them in a total panic because the LA had refused to assess. I have never been asked for money up front by them.

Personally I have found them excellent and would totally recommend them. My DS has not been a straight-forward case at all and without them god know what would have happened to him. They have held my hand through the last 18 months of sheer hell. The only disadvantage has been that my LA hate them with a passion - but then my LA hates all educational lawyers, not just them. (That's not just my opinion, I have that in writing from the LA)

If they didn't think they could take on your DC's case, then at least they were being totally honest with you and didn't let you run up a huge bill with them. A less scrupulous lawyer would have just taken your money and then told you half-way through that they couldn't carry on.