Apologies for complexity 
and length 
Hearing has been adjourned for a couple of months. I have not named an alternative school. I have until the end of the month to name.
Parental preference m/s was not named in the final statement. The LA told us that it wasn't going to be and told us that they were going to name catchment. We were due to move and DS2 attended neither school at that time. Both parental preference and catchment were sent the draft and both were up to their PAN for that year and argued that DS2's presence was incompatible with the efficient education of other children.
Parental preference argued a high number of SEN in that year and identified at least 8 other children (in a class of 28) (i.e. DS with VI, LAC, 3 x ASD, 4 x dyslexia and AS). Ofsted/DfE data shows that there are 6 DC supported at statement or SA+ level across the whole school - 6.3%. There are at least 2 adults in the classroom throughout the day (DC with statement has own LSA).
Catchment also argued a high number of SEN in that year and identified 15 other children in a class of 28 with literacy/numeracy IEPs plus DC with various types of challenging behaviour. Ofsted/DfE data shows that there are 9 DC at statement or SA+ level throughout the school - 5.4%. There are only two adults in the classroom during the morning. In the afternoon the CT is alone.
Data Protection copies of emails shows that the head of parental preference had phoned the LA and was 'adamant that he wouldn't have him'. This seems to have influenced the LA selection. There is no record of assessing whether or not the LA or school of parental preference was able to take reasonable measures to counter alleged incompatibility. The HT's assessment of the number of DC with greater than average need is not based on presence on the SEN register at statement or SA+ level but is not challenged.
There are several internal emails that indicate that the LA want to name catchment, simply because it is catchment, but need to get further advice about what to write in the letter.
There is then a copy of a letter sent to catchment saying that the LA don't accept the grounds of incompatibility and are legally obliged to name the school of parental choice and so 'respectfully requested' that he be admitted. This school was not parental preference!! An admissions application exists for parental preference but not for catchment because we were forced to accept the actions of the LA pending tribunal to appeal placement.
DS2 started the school in September and they have been dismissive and hostile. From September - June they argued to the LA (via secret email) that needs were exaggerated or invented, support was a hinderance and detrimental and so, as it was not needed, it was not possible for them to actually deliver the support in the statement. Despite the LA attending all meetings since March, this position was officially held until the LA EP produced a report for tribunal hearing that agreed with parental views and disagreed with teacher's claims.
DS2 has an offer of a place at indi ss but, at this stage (year 5) I am not convinced that m/s with support can't work and don't want to feel that DS2 is being pushed out of the m/s when it is not in his best interests.
I don't necessarily want DS2 to stay in such a hostile environment just because it is catchment and he is there already. I fear that any improvements to part 3 following tribunal would be worthless and the whole thing would have been a monumental waste of time and money. So, it seems that we face a hostile environment that is not willing to meet need (and is in any case clueless) or a hostile environment with a very good record of meeting need, greater resource, experience and understanding.
So I thought go back to the original school named as preference. But the head won't even let parents visit, the LA agree that we should be allowed but say they can't direct him to allow us to visit and that the school is under no obligation to allow potential parents to visit.
How do I deal with this (assuming I don't just go away). Do I file a request to tribunal asking them to rule that parents are allowed to visit the school? Or do I just name the school in part 4 and explain that the head has refused to allow us to visit?
Can I just say that I am aware of the insanity of asking about naming a school in part 4 that does not want DS2. His existing school don't want him either 
and were still trying to prevent him starting on 4 September after we had done all the preparation 
Here are some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on special needs.
SN children
Appealing Part 4
KOKOagainandagain · 01/10/2015 11:34
Very tough Keep . Particularly because of your experience with DS1 and indi SS after MS not working out for him. Yep, fining parents who take their DC out for a wedding/funeral or even a holiday makes my blood boil too - my DS3 was out of school (ASD, anxiety) for 6 months before he got any LA home tuition.
I don't know what your indi SS school option is like, but I don't think I could put my DS into a school that clearly didn't want him, as is the case with both your MS options . If your DS2 went to the SS could he then move again for secondary back to MS? I know that would not be ideal because it would be a couple of moves within a short space of time, but you would be weighing up staying put in the indi SS against a (hopefully) supportive MS secondary. This is what my DD (HFA, statement) is doing - she will have spent Y5 and Y6 in an indi SS (primary school) and is going to a MS indie secondary.
Do you have any indi MS options for now or secondary?
Sorry I couldnt work out how to say what I was trying to say! You are stuck in a very difficult situation but my feeling is that you need to be looking into the future not now! I know now is the reality but he is yr 5, that last couple of yrs goes really quickly!
If you go with the two mainstreams you have got to do all this again in a yr to name a secondary school! Do you have a decent mainstream secondary where you think he might cope?
I think that you may have to accept that mainstreams are not always able to meet the needs of our children. I am not sure why you are thinking that specialist is second best! In my experience mainstream secondary is a nightmare!!
I feel like you LA are having a laugh because they have been told by 2 mainstreams that they cant meet your childs need and they felt the need to lie to get what they wanted! The judge at tribunal needs to know this before the hearing!
Sorry if that doesnt help you and I really genuinely feel for you
Trouble is, I know there is no exit.
I thought indi ss would be an exit for DS1 - an end to years of fighting (including referral to SS, a bouncer when I was on school grounds etc - complete madness) but it didn't work out that way. It was a hiatus at best - and only because I thought I could stop and take my eye off the ball a breather.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. 'Let's call the whole thing off'.
DS1 has been out of school (indi ss) since January now and no-one gives a toss. LA don't even call me back. I am pissing in the wind. And they want to fine parents whose DC miss a couple of days for a wedding or funeral never mind a holiday. Just fuck right off.
Sorry, not feeling terribly positive
No, not really - I'm not very good at seeing what people are getting at
Please explain the obvious.
Why are they having a laugh?
Current local ss options or further afield ss secondary age options (that don't involve boarding) are very limited due to where we live.
DS2 could remain at the indi ss until 19 - they also do american diploma entry to university. But it is very small - not really a school iysyim?
I think he is a genius (of course) but he is objectively pretty damn close.
I can't square this. Why does my statistically underachieving but very high functioning autistic child have to accept underachievement or transfer to a special school?
I know its really hard but I think you need to sit down and decide what is the best long term option for your Ds!
I totally agree that the PAN should be irrelevant but in reality that is only the case if the school agree that adding the extra child wont impact on the other children! You are not in that situation because both schools were saying that they couldnt meet his needs and yet one took him so obviously decided that they could!
I understand that you would like him to stay in mainstream, I think you have a good chance of coming out with either the SS or your preference! Because of the lying ......'s at your LA coercing the catchment school into taking him!
If you want the SS use the evidence that both schools said they couldnt meet his needs in the first place!!
They are seriously having a laugh, making this go to tribunal!! 
ineed
As I was typing the above I was thinking that the only school that does want DS2 is the indi ss and that, therefore, I should name that school. But I am not sure that it is in his best interests and I feel he is being excluded from the m/s and then I get all militant and then I think 'hell, no, we won't go' but then I think that I felt this way about DS1 being simultaneously pushed out the m/s but deemed to be too mild to need ss, and look how that turned out
I have found it hard to find info relating to my experience. Most stuff is about the right to m/s when the LA want to name ss. There is an assumption that all m/s are the same - able to meet the same local offer. But that is not the case. Why have parental preference if all m/s are the same? Can parental preference only be granted at the start of primary or secondary? My LA place emphasis on PAN and catchment - I thought these were meant to be irrelevant where DC had a statement - hence legal significance of parental preference?
Submit the letter where the LA lied about you choosing the catchment school as later evidence for a start!!
That is utterly crap!!
Would your Ds be better off in the indie school? Would it mean he could stay there for secondary?
These people are playing with your sons life!!
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.