Statement 'not legal'

[BusyLizzie100]

I 've heard from a member of staff who's leaving school that the SEN officer is telling school that DS2's Statement is not a legal document... I despair!

 

That explains a lot about why school doesn't feel it has to implement the whole statement in its entirety (ie work on some things and leave others until a later date... perhaps never).

 

Even the Ed Pscyh has put in a recent report 'there are a lot of strategies on X's Statement but it must be remembered that these are all just suggestions...' Then why does it say 'he WILL have this' and 'he WILL' have that.. we appealed this time last year and the Statement was much improved and provision etc quantified, plus his 1:1 was doubled to nearly full time... it now looks like they just don't want to do it!

 

Well, I have requested a re-assessment of his SEN and will go all the way to tribunal if necessary.

 

At the moment this ridiculous comment that the Statement is not a legal document is hearsay, apart from what the Ed Pscyh put in her report. How can I tackle them on this???

 

Lizzie x

[Cat]

 

The way to tackle this is head on but I think you have to ask someone who knows how a statement needs to be written before it means anything more than the piece of paper it is written on to look at it for you.

 

The reasons I am saying this is because the Ed Pscyh has said that it must be remembered that the strategies are just suggestions. This implies to me that the contents of the statement are not specificed and quantified. However you have said that the provision is quantified and it it is then it needs to be adhered to because the statement is a legally binding document. If the statement is specified and quantified the school should have no issue with knowing what to do because it will be written in black and white for them.

 

IPSEA or Network 81 are probably the best people to help you here but they might have broken up for Christmas now so you will have to wait until after the holidays to contact them.

 

Cat

 

 

[BusyLizzie100]

The way to tackle this is head on but I think you have to ask someone who knows how a statement needs to be written before it means anything more than the piece of paper it is written on to look at it for you.

 

The reasons I am saying this is because the Ed Pscyh has said that it must be remembered that the strategies are just suggestions. This implies to me that the contents of the statement are not specificed and quantified. However you have said that the provision is quantified and it it is then it needs to be adhered to because the statement is a legally binding document. If the statement is specified and quantified the school should have no issue with knowing what to do because it will be written in black and white for them.

 

IPSEA or Network 81 are probably the best people to help you here but they might have broken up for Christmas now so you will have to wait until after the holidays to contact them.

 

Cat

 

Thanks Cat. The history is that his Statement was amended last year, we appealed and with the help of a solicitor the STatement was hugely enhanced. The LA settled five days before the tribunal date. Unfortunately we don't the cash to go back to the solicitor - I think he'd hang them out to dry.

 

Sadly black and white doesn't seem to make any difference - the LA are determined to do whatever they want.

 

Lizzie

[Cat]

Thanks Cat. The history is that his Statement was amended last year, we appealed and with the help of a solicitor the STatement was hugely enhanced. The LA settled five days before the tribunal date. Unfortunately we don't the cash to go back to the solicitor - I think he'd hang them out to dry.

 

Sadly black and white doesn't seem to make any difference - the LA are determined to do whatever they want.

 

Lizzie

 

It is possible that IPSEA might help you to hang them out to dry. The LA can not ignore the statement and do whatever they want. You could write to a few of the Government big wigs telling them about this. Brian Lamb would be a great one to tell given that he is undertaking an enquiry into this and other SEN issues. Ed Balls would also be a good one to tell what is going on. I have an e-mail if you would like it pm me. There are a few people I can bring to mind. Or you could tell the LA that you will be doing this if they do not get their act together. Mr Balls et all do appear to be listening at the moment even if it is just for show.

 

Cat

Edited December 21, 2008 by Cat

[BusyLizzie100]

Yes, I suspect Ipsea would be v interested.

 

Problem is, apart from the little bit that the Ed Pscyh wrote, there is no written evidence that the SEN officer said this. Apparently the school HT and SENCO questioned her comment, but the officer was adamant. The school now seems to be bewildered! I doubt whether the HT or the SENCO will tell me anything more, however.

 

So the problem is that it's their word against mine - and the leaving member of staff is also unlikely to put what she was told in writing either...

 

So yes please, Cat, please PM whatever contacts you have....

 

Thanks,

Lizzie x

[Cat]

So yes please, Cat, please PM whatever contacts you have....

 

I will sort them out and pm them to you.

 

Cat

[baddad]

Hi Bizzy Lizzie -

 

I don't know if it applies to statements but there's a horrible piece of legislation applied to support needs generally that arose from a decision in (I think) Hampshire some years ago which effectively added a get out clause to the delivery of support for identified needs...

The original directive said something like 'Where a need is identified it must be met', but that was qualified to say something like 'where resources and funding are available'... It was meant, of course, to enable reasonable adjustments to be made when services genuinely weren't available or when the costs of buying them could not be justified by the benefits obtained. Of course, it bacame a cop out because local authorities could then not procure services and use the fact that they weren't readily available as an indication that the resources weren't there...

One other problem you might have is when the statement is 'wooly' - so it could say something like (i.e. 'X will receive support with xxx' but then not define the 'when's' and the 'hows'.. another one to watch out for is 'strategies could include', because 'could' is completely open.

If the support needs (and strategies they should be using) ARE clearly defined and the resources available (or obtainable) to meet them then the school should be meeting them, and in that scenario you would be better off pressurising the school rather than seeking further amendments to the statement. If the statement is wooly, tackle that first, because without clear definitions it's all down to the school's interpretation of the content.

 

Very best in either scenario

 

[BusyLizzie100]

If the support needs (and strategies they should be using) ARE clearly defined and the resources available (or obtainable) to meet them then the school should be meeting them, and in that scenario you would be better off pressurising the school rather than seeking further amendments to the statement. If the statement is wooly, tackle that first, because without clear definitions it's all down to the school's interpretation of the content.

 

Thanks, Baddad.

 

I have to say the Statement is NOT woolly, it was tightened up brilliantly by our solicitor. Unfortunately what is happening is the LA is saying it doesn't matter what the Statement says, since 'it isn't a legal document'. And this is the information being fed to school, who of course are doing what they are told to do by the LA, hence the 'a bit now, a bit then' attitude they are taking to fulfilling the Statement.

 

The amended and greatly enhanced Statement was finalised in March and the really worrying thing is that it is making no difference to DS2; in fact he is disengaging more and more but school continue with their bitty approach with, it seems, an aim to just squeeze the autism out of him. ie being prohibitive to get him to do work rather than understanding that the reason he is refusing to work and withdrawing is because he is stressed, overloaded and anxious.

 

There is obviously a great deal more to this situation than I can put in a post, but the main issue I'd really appreciate help/advice on is, how to I now challenge the LA? I have asked for an Early Review of his Statement, they have said no. I have applied for a re-assessment of his SEN, fully expect to be turned down but we will go to tribunal.

 

I don't see how the LA can get away with promoting this 'Statement not legal' attitude!!

 

Lizzie

[baddad]

Hi Lizzy - don't really know what to suggest because the situation sounds completely insane - the LEA have issued an SEN saying what the school should be delivering but then are telling the school they don't have to deliver it?

I don't see much point at this stage in pushing to get the SEN reviewed, because from everything you've said the SEN is up to date and accurate - it's just that it's not being acted upon. I'd be inclined in your shoes to concentrate more on actually recording what specific identified needs aren't being met - i.e. if the statement says he should get 20 hrs per week 1 - 1 but the school is only delivering 10, record that and any explanations the school give about why. Make sure you get any such explanation in writing. When you've done that with each item that is being overlooked and have the written evidence (i.e. the schools/lea's explanations for why it is being overlooked send all of that to the LEA and the school and ask that the recommendations of the SEN be acted upon or for explanations why that can't be done. When you've got all that evidence, go to the ombudmsan or any other watchdog comittee monitoring practice in your area and/or to your MP...

Hopefully others will be able to offer more specific advice, but as a starting point I think all of the above, especially gathering written evidence, would be 'more power to your elbow; for whatever comes next.

 

 

Thanks, Baddad.

 

I have to say the Statement is NOT woolly, it was tightened up brilliantly by our solicitor. Unfortunately what is happening is the LA is saying it doesn't matter what the Statement says, since 'it isn't a legal document'. And this is the information being fed to school, who of course are doing what they are told to do by the LA, hence the 'a bit now, a bit then' attitude they are taking to fulfilling the Statement.

 

The amended and greatly enhanced Statement was finalised in March and the really worrying thing is that it is making no difference to DS2; in fact he is disengaging more and more but school continue with their bitty approach with, it seems, an aim to just squeeze the autism out of him. ie being prohibitive to get him to do work rather than understanding that the reason he is refusing to work and withdrawing is because he is stressed, overloaded and anxious.

 

There is obviously a great deal more to this situation than I can put in a post, but the main issue I'd really appreciate help/advice on is, how to I now challenge the LA? I have asked for an Early Review of his Statement, they have said no. I have applied for a re-assessment of his SEN, fully expect to be turned down but we will go to tribunal.

 

I don't see how the LA can get away with promoting this 'Statement not legal' attitude!!

 

Lizzie

 

[Kathryn]

Oh Lizzie. <'> I nearly threw my drink across the room when I read this. .

 

To cut straight to the point - how to tackle the LA? I think BD's advice above is good - get as much detail as you can in writing about what the school is doing and not doing in delivering the provision set out in the statement.

 

I also suggest that you go for the jugular straight away: write to the LA mentioning that the school have been told by xxx that the statement is not a legal document, and you are confused about this. Could they please clarify the legal status of the statement and confirm whether the LA are obliged to arrange the provision in part 3 in accordance with The Education Act Section 324 (5) (a) (i) which states that the LA: "shall arrange that the special educational provision specified in the statement is made for the child".

 

Hopefully this will draw an admission out of them and once you have this in black and white then you can set about showing how they are not fulfilling their legal obligations.

 

Give them a deadline of a couple of weeks and wait for their reply - if still no joy- then the next step: copy the letter to our favourite director of Childrens Services and write to our MP too- she has been extremely useful to us in the past - she tackled the Director twice on our behalf on two separate occasions.

 

Further down the road and hopefully it won't come to this- possible judicial review if they are still ignoring the statement (in DS2's name so you can get legal aid). These people respond very well to this particular threat. But other complaints routes should be tried first.

 

Don't give up!

 

K x

 

[Karen A]

Hi.I am not around here so much nowadays but BusyLizzie your difficulties have enraged me enough to require a response.

I hope you are able to obtain some action and the people concerned do not just forgett whatever conversations took place once challenged.Karen.

[BusyLizzie100]

Hi.I am not around here so much nowadays but BusyLizzie your difficulties have enraged me enough to require a response.

I hope you are able to obtain some action and the people concerned do not just forgett whatever conversations took place once challenged.Karen.

 

Thanks Karen, Kathryn too. <'>

 

I am determined not to let this slide, it's just annoying that the Christmas hols gets in the way!!! No I'm not really bah-humbug about it but I really do want to challenge these people ASAP.

 

Sometimes it feels like we're living in the Dark Ages, or at least slipping backwards in time. We'll be labelled refidgerator mothers again in no time.

 

Lizzie x

[Karen A]

Thanks Karen, Kathryn too. <'>

 

I am determined not to let this slide, it's just annoying that the Christmas hols gets in the way!!! No I'm not really bah-humbug about it but I really do want to challenge these people ASAP.

 

Sometimes it feels like we're living in the Dark Ages, or at least slipping backwards in time. We'll be labelled refidgerator mothers again in no time.

 

Lizzie x

 

<'> <'> <'> Do try and have a break please if you can.I have learned the very hard way this year that sometimes it is a marathon and not a sprint.I am still bruised and battered following battles with school this year......whilst nothing has really changed....except for my stress and the impact it has on my family.I am sure the HT concerned will not be spending the christmas break taking one second to think about me or my family. Karen.

 

[Erika]

I 've heard from a member of staff who's leaving school that the SEN officer is telling school that DS2's Statement is not a legal document... I despair!

 

That explains a lot about why school doesn't feel it has to implement the whole statement in its entirety (ie work on some things and leave others until a later date... perhaps never).

 

Even the Ed Pscyh has put in a recent report 'there are a lot of strategies on X's Statement but it must be remembered that these are all just suggestions...' Then why does it say 'he WILL have this' and 'he WILL' have that.. we appealed this time last year and the Statement was much improved and provision etc quantified, plus his 1:1 was doubled to nearly full time... it now looks like they just don't want to do it!

 

Well, I have requested a re-assessment of his SEN and will go all the way to tribunal if necessary.

 

At the moment this ridiculous comment that the Statement is not a legal document is hearsay, apart from what the Ed Pscyh put in her report. How can I tackle them on this???

 

Lizzie x

 

[BusyLizzie100]

<'> <'> <'> Do try and have a break please if you can.

 

Excellent advice! I have put all my letter writing on hold for the time being - frankly I'm too occupied with keeping the peace amongst the boys anyway! And I think I feel much better for it. I feel much calmer and at least I won't be making knee-jerk reactions caused by shock when i do get back to it.

 

Lizzie <'>

[HowlingPatrick]

Hi Lizzie,

 

I'm new here and busy finding my way around the site, your post caught my eye, sorry if I'm going over old ground, but hope the following helps -

 

To begin with, a Statement of SEN is a legally binding document. All SEN needs should be explicitly stated in order for specified and quantified provision to be put in place to cater for those needs. Imagine needing an extention on your house and the building firm do not employ bricklayers, would you employ them? The same goes for the school who should be fully aware of all the childs needs, hence the reason they should be explicit in the statement.

 

The following made the news a while ago -

 

A council has been told that the way it is treating children with more serious special educational needs is illegal.

Surrey County Council has been ordered by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) to amend the special needs "statements" it has issued.

Parents had complained that the extra help their children should receive was not specified, as it should be.

Campaigners say similar malpractice is going on elsewhere. The councils argue they are devolving funding to schools.

Parents are said to have made complaints about Hertfordshire, the London boroughs of Ealing and Southwark, Reading, Windsor and Maidenhead, Kent and Bedfordshire, among others.

Deadlines

Surrey, according to the letter sent to the council by the DfES, had adopted "a blanket policy of never quantifying special educational provision in children's statements".

The whole point of a statement, which is issued after an assessment of more difficult SEN cases, is to set out a child's needs and the special educational provision that will meet those needs.

The courts have ruled this must be "specific, detailed and quantified".

The department's letter said it did not appear that Surrey was failing in its duty to assess children.

But it was not clear from the statements it was then issuing "how the school and the child's parents are to know what the authority has determined should be provided for the child".

The letter, from Phil Snell of the department's SEN division, said the education secretary was satisfied Surrey was failing to discharge its duty as set out in the 1996 Education Act.

It was dated 4 January and gave the council five working days to confirm it would comply with the law and 15 working days to send amendment notices to parents - explaining to them why it was making changes and what their rights were.

Mr Snell asked Surrey to confirm how many statements would need amending in this way.

Ongoing

The department said on Friday it had received "a positive and helpful response" from Surrey County Council to the concerns raised in its letter.

It added: "That correspondence is continuing."

There was no immediate comment from the council.

Marion Strudwick of the charity SOS!SEN, which helps parents in such cases, said Mr Snell's letter was useful ammunition.

If Surrey did not comply with the law it could now be challenged in the High Court.

"Phil Snell's letter is quite powerful," she said.

"It's an important move to stop this trend of saying, 'OK we will just give the money to the schools and let them decide what to do with it'," she said.

Legal action

She said Surrey was one of the worst offenders but other authorities had also adopted similar policies.

Instead of detailed statements, they used vague phrases such as saying a child would "have some specialist teaching", without saying how much or who would provide it. they have the right to

The school might be told it would receive funding for this - but without the amount being specified or ring-fenced.

"It's a practice that local authorities are trying to get away with far too much," she said.

 

 

To sum up, there are regulations in place that are not being followed by many LAs who believe they have the right to produce statements 'in their own style'. Although they do have a little freedom in certain areas of the statement, there are other areas of the statement that must be completed in a particular way.

 

If you do a search for the 'SEN Toolkit', you might find it of interest.

 

If I can be of further help let me know, I have access to many relevent documents.