hey ho - off to tribunal we go

[bochead]

Bleurgh!

Totally bonkers these LA bods, as I was quite happy just paying for everything myself (saw it as the price of peace), but I cannot sign off on a final statement that only contains 5 lines of part 4 and NOTHING for parts 1,2,3,5 & 6. It would leave DS in a really sticky situation re exam entry in future.

New LA have effectively withdrawn DS's statement so it's off to tribunal we go as despite my best efforts to avoid it they've left me with no wriggle room for sensible negotiations. I'm going to ask for his online school fees to be paid + the therapies in his existing statement. Works out cheaper than the mainstream option they pushed last term, so hopefully will have a strong case.

I'm utterly fed up with the whole dysfunctional educational system. Mostly cos its so counterproductive, time consuming and wasteful.

Moan over, normal service can now resume .

its just madness isn't it!!!

That's crazy. Unbelievable that they haven't even managed to do Part 1! So you basically have a scrap of paper which could relate to anyone?

You can't appeal Part 1 because common sense is that even LAs couldn't get that wrong - so I'd like to see what the Tribunal has to say about the LA not even managing to do the most basic of details on the Statement!

It should be unbelievable but is, sadly, very believable.

You'll win. The statement is needed because without it, he won't (realistically) be able to get back into the educational system again.

Are you SURE there isn't a private school anywhere that might shove him on the roll to come & say hi to the head once a week? Home schooling 'alternative provision' for part 3, and St Miracleworker High as part 4

Hang on, have they seriously entered a document with everything blank apart from part 4? It has to be a clerical mistake, surely?

Maria - as usual you hit the nail on the head first time out.

My post above was after talking to IPSEA - if I sign this shoddy piece of crap, I'm signing away his rights to do exams or re-enter the education system later on in real terms. I spoke to IPSEA as I was hoping beyond all hope that it was possible to avoid tribunal as he's at home doing online school and I'm paying for everything!

Mark College Somerset - a priory residential place. He has a sleep disorder so requires additional support overnight. The cost for this would be roughly £80K per year. I suppose that would be an alternative to the online school I currently pay for?

I could ask a local private school - but they'd have to fit around the online school timetable - and then I'm sure there would be "attendance concerns" plus I don't have money coming out of my ears, and he still has MAJOR trust issues around adults and school buildings of any description. It's an avenue I'll investigate Maria.

I also need to talk to neighbouring LA's that are funding online schools and gather some ammunition. I'll call it research for my MA ; )

I have an LA monitoring visit next week, so I'll drop it into the convo as it's end of Year 5 statemented pupils are supposed to make the parental request for secondary isn't it? I'll also ask wtf they are monitoring him against without parts 2 & 3?

A few years with no drama was too much to hope for. I've been through a lot, but this is the first time I've ever been tempted to invite the Daily Fail round for a cup of tea!

Not a clerical error - I'm sorry they have included part 1. nennypops.

Just when you think you've seen it all!

Write to them and say that you agree with the gist or parts 2 and 3 but could they please make them more specific as they are required to do so by law.

Ask them if they have been left blank deliberately for you to fill in or summat?

I've spoken to them and asked for a face to face meeting in order to avoid tribunal. I'll follow up in writing once I've calmed down and post it tomorrow, along with the tribunal application. Notification that an appeal has been logged to appeal the withdrawal of parts 2, 3, 5, 6 and the content of part 4 might resolve things. (not that I'll hold out much hope, but hey you have to tick the boxes along the way to show you tried to be reasonable at every state don't you?)

You may as well stick '1' in there too and claim they've missed your middle name or summat!

Stop it Star as I've just gone and reread part 1 and yup - they missed DS's middle name . Now I've gorn and got a fit o' the giggles (or is it hysteria?)

My life plods along nicely and then Bam! Tis like an episode of fawlty towers except with serious consequences for the poor kids every time.

Oh well, once my next OU assessment is out of the way I'll sit down and write a suitable statement myself to use as a starter for 10 if they agree to a meeting. Inviting me to play with blank pages in this manner,is just [insert your chosen comment here]

I have NO idea what they intend to review at the annual review either. I can only conclude they've been taking secret lessons from the guys at bjkmummy's LA.

I thought my LA was nuts boc but yours takes the biscuit.

Reading between the lines they couldn't make head nor tail of the info the last LA sent cos nothing that lot ever did made sense. Anything I've sent them has just been ignored. They aren't sure what to write so have written nothing perhaps?

I don't think this lot are pure evil, like the last bunch, just a bit daft.

If it does go all the way to Tribunal it won't be a complex case for the panel to rule on as they just need to fill in the blanks as per his last statement and agree my very cost effective part 4 request.

I'm still confused, which I'm sure is entirely the fault of your LA. Have they accepted that he needs a statement but seriously issued something with nothing at all in parts 2 and 3? How can a child need a statement if he has no learning difficulties and doesn't need any support?

nennypops - I was beyond confused too! I honestly thought it was a genuine clerical error when I phoned the LA yesterday.

It's no mistake on their part. Wholly illegal, but no mistake.

Ha I thought my LA was the worst, but this is quite something!!

Wow. That has to be a serious abuse on their parts. I'm wondering whether you couldn't threaten them with judicial review. What they've done is to cease to maintain the statement without formally issuing a decision to cease to maintain. And what difference would that make? Why, the fact that if they cease to maintain the statement, remains in force till the tribunal appeal is heard. And that doesn't happen if they amend the statement. It stinks.

At the very least, I suggest you get in touch with your local councillor.

I don't know what the criteria are for judicial review.

I do know Tribunal and LGO are valid avenues at this point, and favour Tribunal just cos I've done it & won it before.

It needs someone external to ask WTF are you playing at?

The thing is, though, it's so blatantly unlawful that you shouldn't have to go to tribunal. And your dc has to go without the support he needs till any tribunal appeal is heard.

Maybe the way to go is to write saying this is blatantly illegal but you will hold off from judicial review, provided they keep the support your dc had under the previous statement in place at least till the tribunal decision comes out.

I'm probably being too soft, but I'll hit the Tribunal trail simply because it is one I know, therefore it's the least stressful route for me. Last year was unbelievably stressful before we left London, and we are about to move out of rental into our permanent house in the near future.

Day to day life is working well after years of firefighting, and lurching from crisis to crisis. DS is happy, after enduring years of sheer misery. My health suffered last year from exhaustion and an eye infection that I could not shake off and I swore that as a lone parent I wouldn't let that happen again. I'm a single parent with no respite or family around to help out.

I'm not going to give up my child's rights without a fight but I'm not gonna let the carrot idiocy become all consuming either to the detriment of family life and health.

In the meantime DS is enjoying his childhood, & making good academic progress. That progress is as spiky as you'd expect for a child with his cognitive profile. I do have faith the Tribunal will sort it out if only because of the exam entry aspect of ceasing to maintain his statement. The LA will have had ample opportunity to do their job by then so the hearing will be simple one if they haven't.

If you've got your evidence together, it could be well worth asking for an early hearing. It's so blatantly wrong, and it would be equally wrong for your child not to get any support until October or whenever a hearing would take place.

Support being put into place after a successful tribunal can take a while. LA's can delay at that stage too - just a friendly heads up for anyone heading to Tribunal. All too often the Tribunal process is abused just to create deliberate delays to provision by LA's.

Boch, is this a draft statement, or a finalised one?

If it's a draft, maybe they do simply want you to write it for them.
If so, you might just find they won't write 'online' for part 4 & keep it as 'home', or else something you wanted in part 3 gets shifted into part 5.

If it's a final one, my guess is they've seen this upper tier judgement which basically (as I read it, with zilch legal training, so bear in mind I could be talking complete nonsense) says if a dc is home educated, their parent must be so good at teaching around the S&L issues that they no longer have learning-related communication SEN.

'if a dc is home educated, their parent must be so good at teaching around the S&L issues that they no longer have learning-related communication SEN.'

Whaaaaaaat?