SENDIST Appeal - Should I object to the LAs underhand attempt to slip in updates to its expert reports as late evidence?

[ChrisInNeed]

Hearing date is 16th June.

Further evidence deadline was 16th May and I submitted all my 3 indie expert reports before that.

At the LA's request the further deadline was extended to 23rd May and the LA submitted its EP and the NHS SALT reports by that date.

The LA requested a further extension until 7th June to submit their OT report and despite my objections the Tribunal has allowed them to do so until 6th June and they did so yesterday.

Yesterday, in addition to the NHS OT's report the LA has also submitted updated EP and SALT reports!

Ostensibly there are some typos corrected but a closer look reveals that the LA's EP and the NHS SALT have tweaked their earlier recommendations to help justify the LA's choice of MS ASD unit! (I am seeking a non-maintained specialist S&L school)

Surely this is underhand?

Surely they cant be allowed to update previously submitted reports after the earlier deadline without permission?

Possible options I can think of are:

1 Object straightaway to the updated EP & SALT reports being allowed as late evidence and seek for the original ones to be used during the hearing

or

2 Rather than objecting, highlight these underhand tactics in my Parental Comments / Statement of Case which I have been allowed to submit by 12th June

or

3 Highlight these underhand tactics during the hearing

I would welcome any views and insights on the suggested course of action I should take.

Thanks

Going on how the Tribunal is behaving towards your case at the moment, I would think that they will overturn your objection to the updated reports and allow the LA to submit them.

However, as you've been given a chance to do a parental case statement, I would put this in both the case statement AND raise it during hearing.

In particular, I would strongly remark in your case statement that the LA are now attempting to make part 2 and part 3 of the Statement (by updating their reports) to match part 4.

Look at this (it's PDF so will download if you click the link) David Wolfe's Noddy Guide to SEN - bottom of page 2/top of page 3.

There is case law that each part should strictly be done in turn - ie you can't do part 4 until part 2 and 3 are done. With the update to reports, if it seems that the LA are suggesting more/different needs/provisions, then they will ultimately be making part 2 & part 3 fit part 4.

I would go through the updated reports, remark in the case statement what has been changed, and if it looks as if they are making "needs" (ie part 2) and "provision" (ie part 3) match part 4, comment on that.

as the evidence deadline has passed I think its extremely naughty they have sent in other reports - if you read the paperwork you got from the tribunal at the beginning with all the dates on etc it states in there that no further evidence will be allowed after the evidence deadline without permission of the tribunal - they clearly do not have this permission and have by the back door shoved these reports in hoping you would not object - however they will also have to have served them on the tribunal as well so I think it could be worth highlighting that this happened - I would speak to the tribunal service on Monday to make them aware this has happened and you object that the LA have done this and ultimately the LA has not sought the permission of the tribunal to do so. If the LA want to submit these reports then they must get permission first and that may mean they apply on the day - im guessing the LA will argue that now they've sent them to you you will have had time to consider them so what is the issue? but ultimately the LA have been damn sneaky and they need to be challenged on it. you may have to be prepared though as frustrating as it is that the panel will allow the reports in - I would also use this time to try and counter anything you do not agree with

also put it into your case statement as well

That explains why the salt did a second visit. Tbh ime the LA always try to see the child before hearing as needs may have changed since SA or they last saw them and they would be remiss not to update recommendations following the last visit. They may have other reasons. I know this is crap but sadly it is normal. Focus on what your DC needs and ignore the machinations of the LA. Tribunal want to settle things on the day and will turn a blind eye to anything not blatantly illegal.

Have you done a comparison of the m/s with unit and parent choice yet? Key questions include similar peer group and access to the full NC. You can find a lot of info online about the LA choice so don't need to wait for experts to get started.

The thing is, if they are going as witnesses they can say the new things they have put in their reports anyway. The tribunal process isn't about parents getti g a fair heari g but about the child getting the right placement so arguably new information, however late should be considered.