I swear if dd's school was a business they would be bankrupt before now.
Surely the first rule of business is know your customers isn't it? So by that reasoning you'd think that if a school knew they had a parent who would make sure they provided what they were legally obliged to do they would be wary of pissing off same parent again considering their previous experience.
But no, they have to try don't they? Can't work out whether the SENCo is stupid or if she thinks I am tbh 
Sent in a email copied to HT reminding them of their obligations and how I will raise with the LEA their failure to provide the support documented and also that should dd be unable to attend because of their failure to provide the support documented I would pursue it as unlawful exclusion.
As an added post script let them know that any staffing or funding issue wasn't my concern (already had apologies because they have TAs off sick) and they should be raising them with the LEA rather than trying to siphon off dd's support to cover shortages elsewhere.
Quite restrained for me considering dd's anxiety is off the scale and she is physically unwell with stress. Hoping my warning shot across the bows means that there is no need for further action anyway.