another day another letter and on it goes......

[bjkmummy]

so lodged my objections this morning about the barrister and the sen officer being an observer.

today we get a letter dated last thursday ( so deffo been held back) to say that they are now calling the LA eP so now they want 3 witness, sen officer and a barrister - now feeling slightly over the top the LA behaviour

When you ask for the request for observer to be refused try and look as nervous, anxious and shaky as possible and say you are already finding it quite overwhelming

senvet is right she can train on any case, it doesn't have to be this one & the barrister should be briefed so she shouldn't be required

they aren't using the training line ...... yet - they asked for her to instruct counsel and sendist already said that's not the purpose of an observer.

last time the LA solicitor wanted to observe , I said no and sendist agreed. think you guys helped me write that objection! I argued that as I wasn't represented she should observe a hearing where the parents were represented.

the sen officer attended both of my previous tribunals - one as a witness but said nothing and the other one she presented it so she can forget that excuse if she tries it. the LA now sit with more people than we have so don't think its unreasonable to say no, I expect she may move possibly to be a witness but I doubt she has the balls to do that cos that's why she got counsel so she can hide behind him and then watch what the witnesses say and of course report back to the LA if any of them speak out of line.

I have been quite disappointed with sendist tbh. I think they sway far to much in favour of the la

Counsel probably charge by the hour, so the later they instruct, the less they spend. And if they can instruct counsel on the hoof as it were then it costs even less.

Have none of it. They should have got their act together.
And don't let them cost you time that should be spent on the big issues

They'll probably just be saying the SEN officer needs to be there in order to instruct the barrister. Say she can do that perfectly well from outside the room.

If or when you have to go back to tribunal in the future, you need to assume from Day 1 that they'll instruct a barrister - that way you won't be taken by surprise.

I don't get this - isn't the la legal rep the la legal rep surely? So the la can basically have two legal people while the parent has none unless the have the money?

My tribunal clerk told me that my la rep was a legal person therefore if he wanted a barrister he'd be out as there would I've two legal entities working for the la case?

the sen officer here I believe has no legal training as such but is expected to conduct cases within the law (LA style of course so not following the law at all)

the tribunal have already issued an order saying that they expect one legal representative only and the sen officer instructing counsel is not what an observer does - think I have a good chance of getting the sen officer out of the court completely - the order also said they expect counsel to attend fully briefed as well. so it now depends whether on the day the LA request again if she can observe then I can object

Hmm, I wonder if it's different for our case as my la rep was legal trained (??!!??) maybe u just got the wrong end of the stick? I was told he could be a rep and a witness - but no one stopped him

Sorry - I mean I got the wrong end of the stick - not u!!

Couldn't be a rep and witness Ffs! I need a drink!

Bloody dyslexia!!! I say exactly what I don't mean!!!
You imagine my evidence...

Ds is like his peers - which should read ds is not like his peers!

It's not like I even misspell - my brain just come out with random tripe! Will shut up now

On the day, they will promise the moon on a stick, saying NIL in their area has so much delegated funding it permits a personal rolls Royce for travel training; and by sheer good luck they just appointed a TA who was a special school headteacher in Bulgaria; plus don't forget all the staff are part way through their Masters in

If provision is newly promised which sounds like it'll never arrive, point this out, and don't be afraid to ask for tribunal to adjourn while the LA and school produce proof that they can do all this, will do it, and would keep the diamond-encrusted provision going for at least 2 years.

The teacher might be planning a sickie

meir we got a specialist who had set up several special schools and units to give evidence about how unrealistic their plans were for producing the staff in the time they were talking.

In summary, her evidence was that the LA was in cloud cuckoo land.

We pretty much got it over the phone and put it in as a note of a telephone call, but in fact she was in tribunal that day and popped in.

AND you are entitled to have your child's SEN met now, not when they have had the chance and cook up some cobbled together placement.

Everything that was promised to me didn't happen. What did happen was the senco went on maternity. Head, deputy head and outreach worker took over but don't even read the email box. Heads also covering as a head of another school as they can't replace head or senco.

So all things that was promised stopped. Then it got 100% worse as the school care so very little they didn't even replace the senco!

If they are not doing something then it's obviously not meeting needs.

im going to argue that her identified needs have to be met - the LA sought not to identify these needs despite the last tribunal ordering that they did. now all her needs are identified (through indie reports) the NIL does not have half of them on it - her identified needs means she needs 25 hours of 1:1 support plus specialist teaching, OT and SALT and other bits and bobs- no way that can be done under £6k a year - that's our case.

the NIL does not reflect all of her needs