K vs LEA - the rematch begins!!!

[Kathryn]

Yup.

 

If you saw my thread in Beyond Adolescence about L's transport to college, you'll know about the hassles we've been having with the LEA - once again.

 

After 4 letters from me to the SEN officer responsible for suddenly and callously withdrawing the transport, and also for overseeing the statementing fiasco, she is still maintaining that "we do not provide transport to students who were not previously statemented and were not at special schools.", and has stuck to this despite me repeatedly asking where in the transport policy this is stated.

 

The DOE whom the MP has been wrting to on our behalf, has parroted this line, until the most recent letter which appears to backtrack (and contradict his own officer), saying that the policy does allow for consideration of students without previous statements, that an application was made, but that it was turned down due to lack of supporting professional evidence. Which makes it look like our fault, when in fact we were never asked to provide any. The application process is done via Connexions and parents are not consulted, neither is professional evidence requested. I doubt whether L's application was ever given more than a token glance becaise they were intent on turning it down anyway.

 

I know that this situation is happening to other students, the LEA has an unofficial policy of excluding particular groups of students using biased and inaccurate evidence. I doubt whether they've ever been challenged before on this.

 

I doubt whether it will get as far as court proceedings, to be honest, I would think that the council would not want it to go that far, but we will see how they respond to the initial "pre - action" letter. Depending on their response, we will then have to decide whether there is a case worth pursuing.

 

Incidentally we wouldn't be doing this if we had to pay our own costs - it wouldn't be worth it, but as the action is in L's name rather than ours, she is eligible for legal aid. She's fully aware of what's going on and although she's a bit nervous about it, she wants to take this step.

 

Help - I'm scared though!!!

[Sallya]

Wishing you really good luck with this K.....it's like a game of bat and ball isn't it.......writing letters back and forth..go and get them....game, set and match

s

xxx

[baddad]

hiya

 

Glad to hear that bit of back pedalling on their part has given you something to go at 'em with

 

Looking at the various loose ends you can draw together, it sounds like you'll have a strong case, especially if you have written evidnce that they have changed their tune from their earlier claims.

 

That said, I don't think they'll reconsider easily, and though they won't take it all the way to court they'll play the mindgame of making it look as though they will, only backing down a day or so before.

 

Still, boxing glove's on - you'll get there!

 

L&P

 

BD

[Bagpuss]

Kathryn, the very, very best of luck <'>

[bikergal]

Good luck, Kathryn <'>

[Karen A]

<'> <'> It must be so stressful having to fight another battle...but great that you are not prepared to back down.

LEAs continue to act in ways that are wrong and unfair because people do not challenge them.

People like you make a difference. Karen.

[annie]

<'> Kathryn and L <'>

 

I don't blame you at all for wanting to go the whole way with them . Good luck and fingers crossed for you both.

 

Annie xx

[RussW]

Have you thought about approaching your local newspaper about this? One thing LA's hate is bad publicity. Naming and shaming usually brings results and if you get a sympathetic journalist who backs your cause they usually back down particularly if the services they should be providing are specified in Law or regualtions and it looks like a case of discrimination!

[Kathryn]

Have you thought about approaching your local newspaper about this? One thing LA's hate is bad publicity. Naming and shaming usually brings results and if you get a sympathetic journalist who backs your cause they usually back down particularly if the services they should be providing are specified in Law or regualtions and it looks like a case of discrimination!

 

Hi RussW,

 

Yes I have, and I have the names of a couple of journalists who are already interested in local SEN issues - and we have plenty of those in this county at the moment! We'll see what the reaction is to the solicitor's letter and take it from there.

 

The trouble is, I can't expose L to that kind of publicity and the invasion of privacy it would bring, without her permission. She's an adult now and aware of what is going on. It would have to be her decision and she would have to be fully involved.

If there's a way of doing it anonymously, that would be better, but journalists usually want names, don't they.

 

K x

[RussW]

If there's a way of doing it anonymously, that would be better, but journalists usually want names, don't they.

 

K x

 

Alas, yes they do...the journo's may be aware of other people in similar circumstances and do a general story, although the impact is never as good. Keep pushing and good luck!

[Cat]

Kathryn some journalists will do things without having names. I was actually offered today to change my eldests name for a piece that I have written for the RNIB and I have dealt with a couple of journalists who were happy to run with a story without using names.

 

Whatever you happens You are one gutsy lady

 

Cat

[Nic m]

More power to your elbow, Kathryn

Good luck i hope you get the result you deserve

Nicola

[Flora]

Kathryn

 

Sorry I'm late to this thread.

 

I really hope you get somewhere with this and will be looking out for updates.

 

Good luck.

 

Flora xx

[bid]

Good luck!

 

Bid <'>

[BusyLizzie100]

Kathryn, you go girl! Well done for sticking up for what's right.

 

Keep us posted as to how you get on...

 

Lizzie xx <'> <'>

[Kathryn]

Thanks guys for your support. <'>

 

We are waiting for the official response from the council which will decide whether we go to judicial review or not. I'll let you know what happens.

 

In the meantime - I have recently discovered from another parent, that one of the main players in this, the aforementioned SEN officer, has left - somewhat abruptly it seems, although I don't know the circumstances.

 

K x

[Karen A]

Perhaps news got round that you were preparing for a fight.

[Kathryn]

Well the solicitor's letter to the Director of CSF last week brought a fairly swift response from the LEA legal department in order to head off judicial review proceedings.

 

They have admitted that the SEN team manager's letters to me do not completely reflect the council's transport policy - (translation: she got it wrong) and the Director of CSF did not clarify the position (translation: he got it wrong too.)

 

They have admitted that the LEA should be following the section of the transport policy that I have been quoting at them all along. Hoo - ray.

 

They've said that the council have actually followed the policy in considering the application, and the DOE has already indicated to the MP that he would be happy to reconsider the application. They are waiting for us to provide further evidence, and had assumed that the MP would "reflect this position" to me. (translation: it's the MP's fault and it's the parents' fault that the LEA haven't done anything yet).

 

What the DOE actually wrote to the MP was "We will of course always reconsider any application if appropriate and recent professional advice is provided by parents". (translation: "we will be forced to reconsider this application because we have used up our usual stock of excuses and lies: and because parental persistence, the intervention of the MP and threat of litigation have finally convinced us that there is no way out of this").

 

Nobody from the LEA has actually contacted us at all - ever - I'm sure the MP will be delighted to know the LEA are expecting her to do their work for them by liasing with us on their behalf and telling us what evidence is required! The solicitor is writing to them to get them to clarify exactly what they are going to do now and what they want from us.

 

So round 1 to us, although we won't be going to court just yet. But my guess is that the LEA will continue to play the usual games, going through the motions of asking for evidence, and turning down the reapplication on spurious grounds - just as they did with the statement. And if they do that, we will be ready to launch judicial review proceedings once again.

 

 

K x

Edited December 1, 2007 by Kathryn

[lorryw]

Hi Kathryn,

Im so sorry Ive missed all of this, Ive been away on a much needed break after my recent battle with our LA.

I know how horribly stressful this is for you and yours, it shouldnt have to be like this.

Interesting that the SEN officer has left. Perhaps she went the same way as my sons Social worker who also suddenly "left" during our run in with the same Local Authority.

Good luck, you know you have them on the run and they will move heaven and earth to avoid court action.

Take care

Loraine xx

[pearl]

I've only just found this, sorry, dont know how I missed it -

Really, really hope you get somewhere now. It shouldnt be this hard, should it <'>

[annie]

Great news that something is finally happening, it's strange what effect a solicitor's letter has isn't it? .

 

We should have a load of twaddle translation thread. Some of the things that we are told/have in writing from professionals that we have dealings with are .

 

Annie

xx

[Bagpuss]

Good luck Kathryn, this must be so difficult for you <'>

[Karen A]

Great news that something is finally happening, it's strange what effect a solicitor's letter has isn't it? .

 

We should have a load of twaddle translation thread. Some of the things that we are told/have in writing from professionals that we have dealings with are .

 

Annie

xx

 

Ah yes but who would moderate the language used on that thread.

By the time we took out anything that needed to be edited.....not much left.

[Nic m]

Kathryn,

 

i think this could be considered a breakthrough!

Well done for your hard work.

Nic

[Flora]

Kathryn, hope this latest break through will do the trick

 

If not, then you have paved the way for further action, but trully hope it doesn't have to come to that.

 

flora

[Kathryn]

We won!!!

 

 

Since I last updated, the battle has continued over Christmas and into the new year. with another solicitor's letter asking the LEA exactly what evidence they were looking for from us, and yet another one to ask them to hurry up with their decision.

 

Today I got a phone call from a very nice person in the SEN dept (she must be new! ) saying they have agreed to fund an individual taxi for L. to college whenever she needs it. This is unheard of for L's particular circumstances.

 

Delighted to be vindicated at last, but this battle has taken six months, has involved the MP, Director of Education, Connexions, our GP - (whose letter was the turning point) and in the meantime we have had to fund transport ourselves which has cost nearly �100 a month, which is a lot considering the distance, and the number of days she was going in.

 

But it all helps to take away the bitter taste in the mouth after our statementing battle three years ago. I never expected them to agree to individual transport - I thought we'd get the grotty college bus offered to us at best.

 

Ironically, L may not need the taxi for much longer; she has been able to walk home from college recently, and she's talking of catching the bus when the weather gets warmer. But we've won in principle, and that's what matters!

 

Thanks for your support everyone throughout this.

 

K x

[baddad]

 

Hmmmmmmmmmm... maybe it's just me being but I'm wondering if you've had to pay out for private transport and it's now agreed that the LEA had a duty to pay for that transport........

 

I'd send the letter even if i didn't intend following up on it just to rattle their cage a little, and you never know...

[Kathryn]

BD, it has crossed my mind to ask them for recompense - but their line is that they have "reconsidered" the decision on receipt of further evidence; they have never admitted that the original decision was wrong.

 

The phrase: "Sorry, we were wrong" does not feature in the LEA vocabulary.

 

I'll consult my lawyer though, (always wanted to say that ) you never know.

 

K x

[baddad]

Ahhhhhhh, but what further evidence? If it was just a case of you reiterating the evidence that has always been on file which they had failed to look at properly... Did they define what the 'further' bit was, 'cos if it was just you (or some higher authority on your behalf) pointing out that they were wrong that's not 'further' evidence it's proof of their own incompetence!

[Kathryn]

Well the transport application form is a joke - a few boxes to tick and a tiny space for the connexions adviser to squeeze in a couple of sentences about the student's condition. No invitation to submit further evidence. So they make their decision based on that bit of paper and then blame the parents /connexions/college for not providing enough information! A neat way of saving money, eh, that can ensure that every discretionary case gets turned down this way. And I know they routinely refuse these transport requests - they turned down someone with cerebral palsy who has greater mobility problems than L. Few parents, on being told "no" pursue it further.

 

In our case I did have to submit new evidence which wasn't already on file, alas - the letter from our GP stating the Hypermobility dx. But they only asked us for this information very reluctantly after six months of battles. I might take the whole lot to the Ombudsman now.

 

K x

[baddad]

It's probably just me, but given the amount of effort these people sometimes put into making us jump through hoops, and the aggro and suffering that causes us/our kids, I usually like to 'make the point' if I feel I'm on safe ground... If nothing else, they tend to remember the people who give them a hard time, and you never know when the next battles looming

 

[pearl]

Oh well done you

I'm with BD on this one - make them sweat!

[Clare63]

Good news kathryn....Well Done

 

Clare x x x

[Guest Lya of the Nox]

well done

[Bagpuss]

Fantastic

 

[bid]

Woop woop!!

 

Bid <'>

[Karen A]

Fantastic news Kathryn.Karen.

[Flora]

Kathryn

 

Fantastic. A moral vitory!

 

Flora

[smiley]

<'>

[lorryw]

Great news Katherine!!