Can the LEA do this?

[lisa]

We went to tribunal in April and changes were ordered to the statement. The LEA have made all the changes the tribunal ordered but have also added a few of their own including taking out some other provision. Luckily I spotted the alterations which sneakily they hadn't highlighted as changes. I'm absolutely livid. They'd taken out the paragraph where it says about receiving termly SALT visits which wasn't even discussed at tribunal and they've never given any indication of wanting to take it out before. I feel like they're just doing it to wind me up.

 

I've written to them and gone through a copy of the statement with a highlighter and marked everything I want them to reinsert and where they've changed wording to put it right. I got a letter back telling me they'd reply to my letter within 10 working days from the start of term which to me suggests they're not planning on changing it back without an argument.

 

Are they allowed to do this? I thought they were only supposed to make the changes the tribunal ordered and leave the rest as it was. It's so unfair. They'd already won on most of the main issues we went to tribunal for so why stick the boot in. What about my right of appeal?

[JsMum]

Thats a horrible trick for the LEA to do, what are these on, their technically taking away a childs treatment, I dont get these people at all.

 

Will he miss any salt sessions while they take their 10 days to sort this out?

 

If he is going to then I would write back as soon as possible and explain that in the time it takes them to deal with this your son will be missing out on therapy and that they are breaking the law.

 

Give them another highlighted copy of where it states SALT again so they can visually see what they are doing.

 

Hopefully they will deal with it this week.

 

JsMum

[Kazzen161]

It seems unlikely this is legal - have you called IPSEA for advice?

 

Karen

[lisa]

It doesn't really effect her at the moment because we're near the end of term and she's already had her SALT visits, the therapist then advises her teacher, LSA and sets her targets and the program through the social skills group. I can't see in reality the SALT service stopping these visits while she's in primary even if it's taken out of her statement . The head of SALT is fantastic and has been really supportive of both my kids.

 

Perhaps I'll give IPSEA a ring. I'm hoping the LEA just change it back when they realise I've spotted it. They got away with it once before with me. After my eldest son's first annual review they sent a new statement through with a covering letter saying they weren't making any changes so stupidly I didn't look at the statement and didn't realise they'd taken stuff out until about 8 months later.

[Kathryn]

No, it sounds as though they're trying it on!

 

 

One hopes they will put right their "error" now you've pointed it out, but you may need to put the boot in. Definitely give Ipsea a ring - they'll advise you on the best way of sorting this out.

 

K x

[madme]

"The tribunal's decision is binding and there will be a deadline for carrying it out. If the LEA (in SEN appeals) or the responsible body (in disability claims) does not do this within the time limit, you can write to the Secretary of State for Education and Skills at the Department for Education and Skills, Sanctuary Buildings, Great Smith Street, London, SW1P 3BT." - as stated on the SENDIST website.

[lisa]

Do you know how long the LEA have to make the changes and re-issue the statement? Our tribunal was 27th April.

 

I think they're trying it on a bit anyway, they re-wrote and sent her new statement fairly quickly, about a week after we got the decision from SENDIST, I replied back within a couple of days and sent my letter off 1st class on 21/05 so they should have received it by the 23rd at the latest. Half term started on the 25/05, in the LEAs reply letter they said they hadn't received my letter until 30/05 and would reply within 10 working days of the start of the new term. I don't believe they did get it on the 30th, they're just using delay tactics.

 

I think they do this sort of thing deliberately to upset and un-nerve the parent. The more I think about it, the more I'm sure they can't be allowed to make additional changes to the statement, otherwise it defeats the whole point of going to SENDIST.

[Kazzen161]

>>I don't believe they did get it on the 30th

 

that's why you should send everything by recorded delivery - you then have proof of when they receive it!

[madme]

Lisa I recall that the Tribunal Order often gives a date by which the LEA must comply. Try calling SENDIST and explaining the situation. Good luck

[lisa]

I got a new statement through today and the LEA have changed everything I'd requested.

 

Tried to make the excuse it was done from an earlier statement but when I pointed out that they'd taken out provision that was in the original proposed statement and every other subsequent statement final or proposed they said they didn't know how it'd gotten taken out.

 

Glad it's all sorted though.

[oxgirl]

Great news, lisa, glad it's all gotten sorted. Well done you.

 

~ Mel ~

[aro]

Excellent Lisa, well done

 

A x

[Kathryn]

Phew - bet you're relieved!

 

It just shows what could happen if parents weren't vigilant enough though.

 

K x