Thomas Flavell & Sons offers a range of legal services to help you as an individual, family, or business organisation. Please choose from the services below for more information on each area of law that we specialise in.
Founded back in 1809, Thomas Flavell & Sons has a long and proud history in providing legal services for businesses and Individuals. Our loyal in-house team offer the highest level of care for all clients.
Thomas Flavell & Sons has offices in Leicestershire and Warwickshire, providing legal services for businesses and Individuals since 1809. Please select any office for directions and contact information.
During a recent 6-month secondment at Warwickshire County Council, I was given the opportunity to gain experience in the world of education law, an area previously foreign to me. This blog documents my experience and the skills I have gained over the course of the secondment.
The main area of education law I became involved with concerned appeals made by parents of children with special educational needs and disabilities (“SEND”). These appeals involved parents appealing the contents of their child/young person’s EHCP.
If the Local Authority (“the LA”) believes a particular child or young person with SEND requires additional support to that which their school normally provides to children or young people, they will issue an EHCP in their name. If, following the issuing of this EHCP the child/young person’s parents are unhappy with the contents of it, they can appeal to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal (“the SEND Tribunal”).
The caseload of appeals I dealt with involved parents appealing against a combination of the following sections of an EHCP:
Once the LA receives both the appeal documentation submitted by parents and the Tribunal’s case directions, the LA is required to provide its grounds of response. The way in which the LA responds depends on which sections of the EHCP have been appealed.
If the appeal in question relates to Section I, the LA responds by either agreeing to name the school parents have requested in their child’s EHCP, or alternatively by proposing an alternative school and opposing parents’ preferred school under one of the grounds found in Section 39(4) of the Children and Families Act 2014. These grounds are:
(1) unsuitability due to the child’s age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs of the child or young person concerned;
(2) attendance of the child or young person at parents’ preferred school would be incompatible with the efficient education of others (i.e. the school is full); or
(3) attendance of the child or young person at parents’ preferred school would be incompatible with the efficient use of resources (i.e. the cost of sending the child to parents’ preferred school is significantly higher than the LA’s preference).
By contrast, in order to address appeals which involve sections of the EHCP other than Section I, the LA and parents (“the Parties”) cooperate through the continual amendment of the child/young person’s current EHCP throughout the appeal, with these amendments being recorded in a document known as the ‘Working Document’. In order to make suggested amendments to the child’s EHCP, it is typical for the Parties to commission professional reports from experts such as educational psychologists, speech and language therapists and occupational therapists. Once these reports are obtained, the Parties then incorporate the findings of these reports into the Working Document before attempting to narrow any disagreements in their respective reports.
During the day-to-day handling of EHCP appeals, I found myself regularly engaging in the following activities:
In addition to dealing with EHCP appeals, I was also responsible for covering the school enquiries hotline 1 day a week.
This role involved providing ad hoc advice to schools who were subscribed to the LA’s hotline service. The enquiries I dealt with over the course of the secondment were varied in nature, ranging from GDPR/data protection issues; issues regarding amendments to school admission policies; and issues relating to parental responsibility (such as providing consent for a child to be vaccinated, agreeing to changes of name etc).
The knowledge and skills I have obtained during my 6-month secondment have been invaluable and I have no doubt these will serve me well in my future legal career. Whilst there were aspects of Council work that differed from my experience in private practice, I have found that the fundamental principles of being able to communicate effectively with clients and appropriate third parties and meeting deadlines are consistent in both.
DISCLAIMER: Please note that the information located within this blog does not constitute legal advice and is for information/educational purposes only.
Our blogs and articles are not meant to serve as legal advice for any specific issue. The author assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the content or any consequences that may arise from relying on it.