Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sally44

SEMINAR by SOSSEN and Barrister John Friel

Recommended Posts

This is a one day seminar being held on Saturday 29th January 2011 from 9.00am - 4.30pm at Maple Hayes School, Litchfield, Staffordshire WS13 8BL.

 

"The workshop focuses on the practical issues of how parents and advocates deal with the Local Authority and/or the Special Needs Tribunal, and tells you how to optimise the preparation of materials for evidence. It will also help delegates to improve their chances of winning at a SENDIST Hearing. Speakers will include the following experienced experts in SEN. John Friel, eminent SEN Barrister; Melinda Nettleton, solicitor of SEN Legal Ltd, Representatives of SOSSEN, Dr N Brown, Principal of Maple Hayes school for Dyslexics, and Dr D Brown, Headmaster of Mapel Hayes."

 

This is not just for children with Aspergers or Dyslexia. It will cover all kinds of SEN.

 

The cost is £30.

 

www.dyslexia.gb.com or office@dyslexia.gb.com for info. Tel: 01543 264387.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SOSSEN are based in the next borough to me. If you go do expect a very strong sales pitch. Not for nothing does Richmond have a very high tribunal rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That may well be the case. But it is also a good opportunity to get some free advice from experts in the field and maybe learn more about the process and what the school/LEA's legal responsibilities are and how best to present your case if going to tribunal alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched John Friel give evidence to the Children schools and families select committee. He was brilliant. Well worth a visit, I'd say.

 

cb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had I missed something here? Has sueing LEAs become the next growth sector for law suits - an alternative to ambulance chasing?

Don't get me wrong - I do have every sympathy for parents locking horns with LEAs etc - but siminars being run by 'charidees' charging £95.00 per person for workshops explaining how to appeal a final statement (I looked), who will put you in touch with friendly, clued up, 'specialised' barristers and solicitors who'll know how to get the job done ;)...

Sorry. I don't like it. Anymore than I like ambulance chasers or the people who procure their services. I have no doubt that a clever barrister can find loopholes, legislation and so on to pummle your average LEA officer into the ground, but ultimately victory's won on that basis are just going to mean cutbacks somewhere else (robbing Peter to pay Paul). That, of course, generates even more work for the clever barristers and solicitors, and gets more people signing up out of necessity for £95.00 a throw seminars, but the more money LEAs are forced to spend defending cases costing thousands of pounds in solicitor's fees the less there is left in the pot for making sure the right provision is offered to the right child on the merits of their case rather than going to the the kid whose parents engaged the most expensive legal team.

 

I'd never heard of SOSSEN until this post, but just a glance at what the 'offer' is enough to convince me that CMJ's prediction of a 'hard sell' will be on the money. And if Richmond has a very high tribunal rate, perhaps the people of Richmond should be asking how much of a percentage of LEA funding is being spent on those tribunals, and how the average legal fees of a SOSSEN backed tribunal compare to those of a non-SOSSEN backed one (and as a side issue, whether there's a noticable difference in the outcomes?).

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were extremely fortunate in that we didn't need to go to tribunal to get the funding for a residential special school placement for my son. I've since learnt that we are in the massive minority. I work with some young people who will never be able to live independently and have complex, life-threatening medical needs, and yet unbelievably many of them still have to go to tribunal over their funding. So I fully understand the need for professional support when it comes to taking LAs to tribunal.

 

However, I do remember this organisation from when they were first established and advertised themselves on here. The main question I think I remember was why they were charging for support that is available for free from people like IPSEA and ACE...basic things like how to apply for a Stat Assessment. (Apologies if I've got this wrong, or things have changed.)

 

So, I would say just be aware that you can get extremely good advice and support for free, especially in the early stages of the Statementing progress. As for having professional legal advice if you go to tribunal, I don't feel able to comment as we were very, very fortunate not to need this, as I say. But I would probably save any money for this, rather than spending it at the Stat Ass stage.

 

Bid :)

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work with some young people who will never be able to live independently and have complex, life-threatening medical needs, and yet unbelievably many of them still have to go to tribunal over their funding. So I fully understand the need for professional support when it comes to taking LAs to tribunal.

 

Bid :)

 

Yep, totally agree... And that's why LEAs should respond to needs rather than threats, and allocation of resources should be based on assessment rather than the quality/expertise of the legal representation at tribunal. Often, the most needy will be the least likely to have access to the 'best' representation, and the parents/carers of the most needy will have the least time and resources to put into sourcing it. So in a situation where there is one placement with two people after it - one of them with much greater needs but poorly respresented and one whose needs are less profound but presented by people who know exactly what 'I's' to dot and 'T's' to cross - it's a no-brainer as to which one is going to lose out. Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for 'the system' in any way - because the system is totally flawed. But buying in 'expertise' from people who are morally one step removed from the process (and I would trust your average barrister about as far as I could throw him if it came down to it) can only make it worse rather than better.

As Bid said - there are lots of free resources out there and those in need can find access to very good advocates if they know where to look. Unfortunately, the profile of those free services will almost certainly be much, much lower than the profile of 'non-profit' charidees who offer seminars at 95 quid a punt, or the solicitors whose paid services they recommend. And the more people who turn to the latter the fewer will turn to the former, with the inevitable result that eventually a budget is gonna get cut somewhere. :wallbash:

Barristers will do whatever it takes to win their case, regardless of any rights or wrongs. That leads to huge injustices in criminal law every day, and will do so in any other sector it's allowed to infect, whether it's 'health and safety' claims or special needs educational provision.

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a really difficult one though :( ...LAs automatically have a barrister if a parent takes them to SENDIST, which automatically puts the parent at a huge disadvantage :( And there absolutely has to be an appeal system for parents.

 

Not sure what the solution might be, but I do have reservations over the whole charging thing, esecially for the early stages of applying for a Stat Ass...

 

Not sure what the answer is for the parents who aren't as articulate or as confident/bl00dy-minded either :( They are definitely disadvantaged...but then equally, parents who do have the ability/inclination/pig-headed stubborness to research and push, push, push shouldn't be penalised either...

 

Bid :unsure:

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a really difficult one though :( ...LAs automatically have a barrister if a parent takes them to SENDIST, which automatically puts the parent at a huge disadvantage :( And there absolutely has to be an appeal system for parents.

 

Not sure what the solution might be, but I do have reservations over the whole charging thing, esecially for the early stages of applying for a Stat Ass...

 

Not sure what the answer is for the parents who aren't as articulate or as confident/bl00dy-minded either :( They are definitely disadvantaged...but then equally, parents who do have the ability/inclination/pig-headed stubborness to research and push, push, push shouldn't be penalised either...

 

Bid :unsure:

 

Nope. No easy answer (apart, obviously, from a HUGE expansion of available provision so everyone can get what they need.... *sigh* dream on!), but people profiting from the holes in the system (which however you look at it, a barrister living off of the fees he's paid either by his clients or by the losing LEA) can only be a double whammy, IMO.

I do totally agree that parents/carers who haven't - for whatever reason - got the wherewithal to fight their child's corner shouldn't be penalised, but any sort of service that charges is only going to disenfranchise the disenfranchised more. I wonder, do any of their solicitors they recommend work 'pro bono'? And by that I mean genuinely pro bono; not 'no win, no fee', or 'non-profit making' or any other paid-in-all-but-name scheme, like 'the first half an hour is free'...

Am I coming across as cynical about the legal profession? :lol::lol:

The difference between an estate agent and a barrister?

Both would sell their grandmother, but only the barrister would then sue granny for compensation for the emotional damage arising from the separation.... :whistle:

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baddad- there were a lot of flaws in the Lamb report - lots of people think the recommendations didn't go far enough. But after looking into the system Lamb recommended:

 

Currently legal aid is available to support parents in the preparation of their case but not for representation at a hearing. The NatCen report identifies how parents who could not afford legal representation, and those who could, felt about this:

 

...parents who could not afford to hire legal help and were approaching a date for a Tribunal hearing expressed concern that they would not be able to represent themselves adequately and suspected that legal representation would stand them in better stead to achieve a successful outcome. Indeed, those parents who were able to employ a solicitor, and perceived it to be a necessary part of preparing for a Tribunal hearing themselves, questioned the parity of a system where this was the case.

 

It is better for everyone if provision is made for children without recourse to the Tribunal. However, the cases going to a hearing are becoming more complex and issues under contention are more likely to be matters of law to be decided, rather than matters of fact to be established. Despite changes in the Tribunal system, many parents are finding appeals too difficult and complex and feel unable to pursue their claim without legal support. This leaves only those with considerable personal and financial resources able to afford representation.

 

With increasing complexity and in the interests of equity legal aid should be available for parents attending a Tribunal hearing. This is a matter with direct consequences for parental confidence. However, subject to financial qualification, there is already provision, for ‘exceptional funding’ where a case meets a criterion of overwhelming importance to the client or a threshold for complexity. This scheme has been little used, is not well publicised and the procedures for accessing the funding are reported as being slow and complex.

 

The Ministry of Justice should review the procedures and the timescales for accessing funding with representative legal advisers working with parents of children with SEN. The scheme should be re-launched by March 2010. If a re- launched scheme does not increase access to legal aid in complex cases, all parents who qualify should be entitled to legal aid for representation at Tribunal.

 

My own personal experience is that legal aid is not available pre-tribunal - no solicitor was willing to take a case on using legal aid (legal help).

Edited by Yossarian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. No easy answer (apart, obviously, from a HUGE expansion of available provision so everyone can get what they need.... *sigh* dream on!),

but that's what the law says- it is the legal right of sen children to have their needs assessed and then met

 

but people profiting from the holes in the system (which however you look at it, a barrister living off of the fees he's paid either by his clients or by the losing LEA) can only be a double whammy, IMO.

 

Not sure which holes you are referring to here? Would it be the ones that allow local authorities to time and again flout the law without any corporate consequence?

 

I do totally agree that parents/carers who haven't - for whatever reason - got the wherewithal to fight their child's corner shouldn't be penalised, but any sort of service that charges is only going to disenfranchise the disenfranchised more. I wonder, do any of their solicitors they recommend work 'pro bono'? And by that I mean genuinely pro bono; not 'no win, no fee', or 'non-profit making' or any other paid-in-all-but-name scheme, like 'the first half an hour is free'...

 

Why should solicitors work for free? Local authority staff don't. LA barristers don't. EPs don't. Lawyers and legal reps provide a vital service. See my last post for more on this. And yes, legal help does come free from places like IPSEA and SOSSEN. And at my tribunal, which stretched to two days my legal rep instantly waived his fees when it ran over.

 

Am I coming across as cynical about the legal profession? :lol::lol:

The difference between an estate agent and a barrister?

Both would sell their grandmother, but only the barrister would then sue granny for compensation for the emotional damage arising from the separation.... :whistle:

 

Ahh- the sound of a man who doesn't know what he will miss till it's gone. The rule of law is a very civilising thing. You personally benefit in many ways from lawyers fighting for the law to be upheld. You don't realise it. Well it's going under this government, so it's just a matter of waiting....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi yossarian -

I totally agree the rule of law is a very civilising thing. Unfortunately, the process also involves lawyers, who've not got the best reputation, it has to be said, for straight talking. Have you read 'Bleak House' by any chance? :lol:

I'm not sure that the law says children have a right to be assessed and then have their needs met . I think it says things like 'most appropriate' too. The whole issue is that the LEA may have one view of where the needs can be best met, with the best use of the resources available, and that a parent/carer may have a different view, with that disagreement creating an opportunity ripe for exploitation by people willing to put themselves in the middle. As soon as that middle ground becomes profitable, you have to be realistic about the possible motives of the people putting themselves in the middle. If there are services that charge for offering support (even if dressing up charges as 'seminar fees') their motives have to be more questionable than a service that doesn't charge. If there are services that recommend specific barristers or solicitors (perhaps barristers or solicitors with direct connections to the charity itself) then their motives have to be more questionable than those of a service that doesn't offer such recommendations...

 

And I don't think solicitors should 'work for free' either... but I do think if they fly under a banner that claims to be offering 'free advice' then it's very misleading. 'I advise you to give some money to this man' may be free advice, but acting on that advice incurs costs, and if there's a direct link between the agent offering the first piece of (free) advice and the second agent charging for advice then there's a very fine distinction between the two.

 

As I've said - I'm not defending the 'system' because the system stinks. I just think it's bad enough without adding another stink into the equation. Personally, I think once solicitors get involved in ANY disagreement the chances are it will just get smellier!

Anyhoo - happy to agree to differ, and I think this is sort of wandering from the original topic so i'll bow out now. In a nutshell, my own feeling is that all the time there are free services out there for people to use they should use them, and it will be a sad day when those free services are gone. The more people that elect to buy services, the more justification there is for cutting funding to the free ones.

 

L&P

 

BD

Edited by baddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cost of this seminar is £30 (don't know where a figure of £95 came from?). Which I think is comparable to getting initial advice from any solicitor for around this figure or higher.

 

Those that want to go can go and those that don't want to go simply won't attend. Freedom of choice.

 

Many parents will attend to get advice to help them prepare a better case for their child at tribunal simply because they cannot afford to pay to get independent reports or legal advice.

 

For my child's tribunal appeal the LEA are taking the SALT, EP and their own legal representative. I will be there on my own unless I can get someone from IPSEA or the British Dyslexia Association to come with me.

 

There is absolutely no doubt that parents get a better outcome at appeal with legal and professional representation. You cannot attend tribunal and have nothing to back your argument other than to say "I feel" or "I believe" my child needs are ...... You have to have a professional identify the need and make the recommendation. And before someone says "professionals say anything you want" that has never been my experience when dealing with independent professionals. But it HAS been my experience when dealing with LEA ones because they have to follow the LEA line and cannot say what they think is best for the child. They have said so to me and one of them put that in writing.

 

I know two families who have their children in independent school settings because they have used the same legal professionals attending this seminar. They were able to counter argue the LEAs professionals and won. At least that is a level playing field rather than a line of professionals up against a lone parent.

Edited by Sally44

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cost of this seminar is £30 (don't know where a figure of £95 came from?). Which I think is comparable to getting initial advice from any solicitor for around this figure or higher.

 

Those that want to go can go and those that don't want to go simply won't attend. Freedom of choice.

 

Many parents will attend to get advice to help them prepare a better case for their child at tribunal simply because they cannot afford to pay to get independent reports or legal advice.

 

For my child's tribunal appeal the LEA are taking the SALT, EP and their own legal representative. I will be there on my own unless I can get someone from IPSEA or the British Dyslexia Association to come with me.

 

There is absolutely no doubt that parents get a better outcome at appeal with legal and professional representation. You cannot attend tribunal and have nothing to back your argument other than to say "I feel" or "I believe" my child needs are ...... You have to have a professional identify the need and make the recommendation. And before someone says "professionals say anything you want" that has never been my experience when dealing with independent professionals. But it HAS been my experience when dealing with LEA ones because they have to follow the LEA line and cannot say what they think is best for the child. They have said so to me and one of them put that in writing.

 

I know two families who have their children in independent school settings because they have used the same legal professionals attending this seminar. They were able to counter argue the LEAs professionals and won. At least that is a level playing field rather than a line of professionals up against a lone parent.

 

Hi sally - Just popped back in to clarify the couple of points you raise...

 

The £95.00 I mentioned was the cost of another service they offer, detailed in my first post:

 

Don't get me wrong - I do have every sympathy for parents locking horns with LEAs etc - but siminars being run by 'charidees' charging £95.00 per person for workshops explaining how to appeal a final statement (I looked)...

 

I totally agree that you shouldn't attend a tribunal with nothing to back you up other than saying 'I feel' or 'I believe', but that should be medical evidence, IMO, rather than some clever semantics over interpretation of the 'letter of the law' or whatever. A Barrister may be excellent at the latter and 'win' a case (and the prefered placement) on those merits, but it's not a needs led allocation of resources, which is what I think the system should offer. In preparing a case, a barrister may direct a parent in the right direction regarding what evidence will be helpful to them, but they will be charging by the minute while they do so and offering the same advice that's available for free elsewhere...

 

I totally agree that people choosing to attend/not attend is freedom of choice. Hearing the views of those who have concerns about free services that charge along with the views of those who don't have concerns about free services that charge can help inform people regarding the free choices they make (or purchase).

 

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know too much to post on a public forum, but let's just say that if you ask a bunch of lawyers for a remedy it will generally involve a legal battle. I know the PPS at Richmond and they are more than happy to guide parents within the absolute letter of the law, as they're both parents of children with SEN themselves.

 

ETA: in Richmond the PPS attends the SEN Panel - you'd never get a solicitor in there, no matter what they charge!

Edited by call me jaded

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel the contribution of the tribunal panel has been a bit neglected in this discussion - as if panels make decisions without due consideration, and if parents have representation they will win an 'unfair' settlement. A panel is chosen for it's expertise and is, in most cases, perfectly capable of making good judgements. At present this is the the legal remedy for parents unhappy with the provision for their children. The tribunal system was designed this way partly because judges do not have the expertise to preside over these matters. Look at High Court rulings for examples - they refer back to tribunals.

 

Another general point - local authority staff are usually well practised at appearing before a tribunal, whereas for parents it is often the first time. Tribunals do take this into account, but it is exceedingly difficult to level that particular playing field

Edited by Yossarian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And parents would be happy to go with LEA reports IF and WHEN LEAs do follow the code of practice and identify needs and recommend how to meet them. Until they do that parents will go to tribunals. And LEAs do have blanket policies to exclude parents ie. always refusing the first request for an assessment towards a Statement to screen out those parents who are not prepared to go to an appeal about a refusal to assess.

The fact that LEAs don't have any motivation to produce legal Statements (look at the IPSEA website about specific councils where ALL of the Statements they have made have had to be looked at again because so many of them have been illegal and parents have won tribunal after tribunal until all Statements were screened), it is very clear that the LEAs position is not child centred or needs centered, it is cost centred.

 

I think this seminar will make parents aware of what the process is and what kind of paperwork they need to provide.

 

I have yet to come across any parent anywhere that has been told by the LEA or even the Parent Partnership how to navigate the SEN process. For many parents simply asking the right question of the right individual (in writing with a deadline to reply by) would save them years of going round and round in the SEN process with nothing being done. But no-one tells you this. I cannot count the number of times I have been given mis-information or incorrect information by professionals who don't even know how the system works themselves! Eg. the clinical psychologist telling me to get the autism advisory teacher involved, when the AAT says she is not allowed to go into my sons school as that school is out of her remit and should have the equivalent person already present in-house. Well that is news to me as i've never heard of such a person. I've asked the school "who" that inhouse person is and am waiting to get their reply. But if they exist they have not been involved with my child eventhough he has the severe difficulties he has and eventhough his statement said he should have access to such a person.

 

And yes, IPSEA do give advice for free, but you cannot always get through to them and they don't do seminars on the subject. And IPSEA have said themselves that they cannot cope with the amount of calls and referals they get now, nevermind when Legal Aid/Help is cut leaving the most vulnerable families with no representation at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, totally agree... And that's why LEAs should respond to needs rather than threats, and allocation of resources should be based on assessment rather than the quality/expertise of the legal representation at tribunal.

 

If LEAs did respond to needs, there would need to be fewer threats and fewer challenges to decisions. Training teachers to deal with SENs in mainstream schools would be a good place to start and put less pressure on LEAs - as you point out, the system is totally flawed.

 

(and I would trust your average barrister about as far as I could throw him if it came down to it)

 

I'm not sure John Friel is 'your average barrister'. If he was, he wouldn't be putting on seminars for £30, and I'm quite sure SOSSEN have quite enough business already, without needing to drum up more business.

 

As Bid said - there are lots of free resources out there and those in need can find access to very good advocates if they know where to look. Unfortunately, the profile of those free services will almost certainly be much, much lower than the profile of 'non-profit' charidees who offer seminars at 95 quid a punt, or the solicitors whose paid services they recommend. And the more people who turn to the latter the fewer will turn to the former, with the inevitable result that eventually a budget is gonna get cut somewhere. :wallbash:

 

Why do they have a 'lower profile' do you think? Why is it so many parents don't know about parent partnership, parent advocates, the SENCOP etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. No easy answer (apart, obviously, from a HUGE expansion of available provision so everyone can get what they need.... *sigh* dream on![/quote}

 

 

 

We don't need a huge expansion of available provision - as you said earlier the system is totally flawed. What we need is;

 

- teachers trained to support all children they are expected to teach, not just those in the normal range. Teaching is about supporting learning, not about delivering the curriculum

 

- sufficient properly trained advisory professionals - not ones who are so overstretched they can only assess, assess and assess again

 

- properly trained TAs - if teachers were properly trained very few children would need a TA anyway

 

- an education system designed round learning, not around political point-scoring

 

And yes, I do think it's possible, because some schools and local authorities seem to manage it in spite of government tinkering

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh?

Are we still on the same topic here, or have I looked at the wrong thread?

This is what I am saying:

 

I have concerns regarding free services that charge for giving the same advice as free services that don't charge.

I don't think that increasingly expensive tribunals arguing points of law that don't consider the realities of oversubscribed services are the best way to use LEA funding.

I don't think that decisions reached at increasingly expensive tribunals arguing points of law that don't consider the realities of oversubscribed services are the best filter system for allocating oversubscribed resources.

 

I'm not defending LEA's or 'the system' in any way, shape or form, and i'm not claiming to have any solutions, I'm just saying the above. I'm also not 'attacking' any organisation, either - I'd be equally concerned if IPSEA (or any other advisory service) started charging for free services or started recommending the purchase of services from people on their own board of directors or otherwise associated with them.

 

If someone wants to explain to me why it is wrong to be concerned about people offering free services that are not free or that recommend paid services offered by themselves/their own associates I'm more to happy to read it, but if they just want to go off at tangents about the flaws in the current system I can assure them they don't need to, because they're preaching to the converted.

 

As I said, happy to discuss the issues I've raised with anyone who wants to respond to them, but other than that let's just agree to differ regarding the barristers etc, and agree to agree about the appaling lack of resources and the impossibility of keeping all of the people happy all of the time.

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know too much to post on a public forum, but let's just say that if you ask a bunch of lawyers for a remedy it will generally involve a legal battle. I know the PPS at Richmond and they are more than happy to guide parents within the absolute letter of the law, as they're both parents of children with SEN themselves.

 

ETA: in Richmond the PPS attends the SEN Panel - you'd never get a solicitor in there, no matter what they charge!

 

Hi Jaded :D

 

Don't know if it's because I've had the worst day's sleep EVER with a head full of wretched work-related shizzle or my AS...but I don't understand your post! :hypno::wacko::blink:

 

What/who is PPS?

 

I know there's another 'layer' to what you're saying, but can't work out what it is! :lol:

 

Oh dear...sleep deprivation!

 

Bid :wacko:

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol too cryptic for my own good.

 

PPS - Parent Partnership Service

 

What I'm saying in my first sentence is if you say to a lawyer that you have a problem and ask what you can do the answer will generally be sue, or take them to court or other adversarial action. Parents often feel it's their only option, especially after consulting a solicitor.

 

PPS however knows what the current practice is in that LA and in the vast majority of cases can guide parents and schools through the maze of paperwork to get what needs to be on the cover sheet when it goes to Panel is actually there. I don't know if you're aware but a two-hour panel meeting may have to get through 50 cases. You need to make it as simple as possible for them to make a good decision.

 

Could go on at length. My parents organisation rarely goes to tribunal. We have one on Tuesday that I'm not at all convinced we'll win. It has not cost the parent anything to get there and she has known from day one that the outcome is marginal. The input we've had from a PPS officer volunteering for us has been invaluable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And yes, IPSEA do give advice for free, but you cannot always get through to them and they don't do seminars on the subject. And IPSEA have said themselves that they cannot cope with the amount of calls and referals they get now, nevermind when Legal Aid/Help is cut leaving the most vulnerable families with no representation at all.

 

IPSEA occasionally do run seminars: there was one in Hertfordshire about the SEN/ statementing process just before Christmas, it was by invitation from a local support group and was for parents. And it was free. IPSEA may do a workshop near you if enough people want it, if you're part of a group, why not ask?

 

On the second point, SEN charities help loads of parents for free, but they don't have unlimited resources, and the current economic climate is placing greater pressure on them. Legal aid for education cases is now in jeopardy which means that many more people who would have qualified under Legal Aid for free preparation and professional reports, will no longer get it. The government has said that such parents will be OK as charities such as ACE and IPSEA provide this support. WRONG!! ACE does not do SEN casework, that has never been its function, and IPSEA is already stretched to the limit with cases who do not qualify for legal aid, and in any case IPSEA could not provide access to free independent reports which are sometimes vital at tribunal. Add to that the fact that sources of funding for these charities may continue to dry up and you have a desperate situation.

 

It would be good if all PPS were as good as yours, Jaded, , because there is so much good work they could do to head off disputes. Sadly they are not. Some back off as soon as they hear the word "appeal", or there is a whiff of anything contentious between a parent and LA. Some parents engage with the system for years without even knowing what PPS are. On another point, parents need to be more aware of dispute resolution too: LEA's are required to make these independent services available but parents either don't know they are there, or don't trust them enough to use them.

 

Just a word about barristers, and other legally qualified people: there are some good ones out there, many of them giving their services for free, for IPSEA or other charities because they believe in a better deal for children with SEN. Sometimes they are essential. You don't need legal representation to win at tribunal, many parents do so successfully without this, either on their own or with a non legal rep who knows their stuff. If however you want to challenge a Tribunal decision on a point of law, you do need legal help to take it to the Upper Tribunal and/or Court of Appeal. And it is in these arenas that important caselaw is made - caselaw which we take for granted and which tribunals rely upon but which once had to be thrashed out by people who understand the finer points of the law: (eg. the principle that Speech Therapy is usually educational provision and should therefore be in part 3, just to take one). In the interests of justice, it's vital that these groundbreaking cases continue to be heard in the highter courts, and the law refined and tightened up as a result.

 

Outside the courts, there are legally trained representatives of charities who meet with MP's, give evidence to select committees and engage with the decision makers in all kinds of ways in order to chip away bit by bit at the injustices that prevail. How was it, do you think that parents got the right of appeal after a refusal to amend a statement? Not by Ed Balls suddenly sitting up in bed and thinking, "The SEN appeal system sucks. I know. Lets make it fairer and easier for parents!"

 

Legal eagles have their uses, don't knock them all!

 

This sounds like a defence of SOSSEN but it isn't meant to be. I know nothing about them. They are a charity and running workshops is one of their sources of funding apparently, which is fair enough,I suppose, but I do have reservations about taking money from parents who are no doubt in desperate situations or they wouldn't be signing up. £10 or even £20 maybe, to cover expenses, but £95 seems a bit steep.

 

Much more I'd want to say but I'll stop ramblin' on!

 

K x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think there is a massive shake-up on the way and funding will no longer be attached to statements in the way it is now.

 

Kathryn our PPS stands back when it starts getting hairy but points them in our direction. We've just invested some money in education Step-by-Step manuals from ACE which will allow our volunteers to give legally accurate advice with the backing of a 'professionals only' phone number to back it up. A group of people can get together and do this with a little help from your local CVS, including sources of funding. Start here to find your local organisation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kathryn - great post. Agree with nearly all except about mediation. A friend who is in a v good position to know told me that mediation is more or less a discredited service - it is not seen as working effectively. We were advised not to use it and there were no negative implications drawn at our tribunal.

 

What might work better for appeals would be active case management. In our case a tribunal judge would have thrown out the LA's provision right at the beginning, rather than having to wait 6 months. Asking an LA at that stage, for example, why aren't you following the recommendation of your own ed psych? would have worked wonders I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a one day seminar being held on Saturday 29th January 2011 from 9.00am - 4.30pm at Maple Hayes School, Litchfield, Staffordshire WS13 8BL.

 

"The workshop focuses on the practical issues of how parents and advocates deal with the Local Authority and/or the Special Needs Tribunal, and tells you how to optimise the preparation of materials for evidence. It will also help delegates to improve their chances of winning at a SENDIST Hearing. Speakers will include the following experienced experts in SEN. John Friel, eminent SEN Barrister; Melinda Nettleton, solicitor of SEN Legal Ltd, Representatives of SOSSEN, Dr N Brown, Principal of Maple Hayes school for Dyslexics, and Dr D Brown, Headmaster of Mapel Hayes."

 

This is not just for children with Aspergers or Dyslexia. It will cover all kinds of SEN.

 

The cost is £30.

 

www.dyslexia.gb.com or office@dyslexia.gb.com for info. Tel: 01543 264387.

 

Why is everybody talking about £95 cost when the OP clearly states it is £30!

 

Well said, Kathryn. :thumbs:

 

danaxxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After posting about this event, and its subsequent robust discussion, I am now unable to attend because we are going to see Peter Congdon EP on that day [recommended by the Dyslexia Association]. He is able to carry out a comprehensive range of cognitive assessments at a fraction of the costs quoted to me by others.

I wish I had a clone that I could send to record it for me. If anyone goes please post about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...