..whilst they sit and wait for Tribunal Powers to be reduced! What Parents need to know!
A growing number of parents are reporting the same disturbing pattern: local authorities dismissing school consultations, claiming a placement is “parental preference” even when no other school has said they can meet need, and refusing to share the consultation responses they are relying on. Instead of following the SEND Code of Practice, some LAs are issuing plans based on incomplete or incorrect information and telling families they will simply “deal with it later.” This is not how the law works, and parents deserve clarity on what should happen next.
When a parent requests a school for Section I of an EHCP, the local authority has a legal duty to consult that school and any others they consider appropriate. The purpose of consultation is simple: to gather accurate, honest information about whether a school can meet the child’s needs. It is not a tick‑box exercise, and it is not something the LA can override because the answer is inconvenient. If a school says they cannot meet need, that response must be taken seriously. If multiple schools say they cannot meet need, the LA cannot simply ignore those responses and declare the parent’s choice to be “preference.” Preference only applies when more than one school is suitable. If only one school can meet need, it is not preference – it is necessity.
Parents are now reporting that LAs are dismissing consultation responses as “non‑compliant” with the Code of Practice, even when the schools have provided clear, lawful explanations. Some LAs are refusing to share the consultation responses altogether, leaving parents unable to challenge inaccuracies or omissions. This lack of transparency is not supported by law. Parents are entitled to see the evidence the LA is relying on, especially when it forms the basis of a decision about placement. Without access to the consultation responses, parents cannot meaningfully participate in the process, and the LA cannot claim to have acted fairly.
The most concerning trend is LAs preparing to issue EHCPs with the wrong information, knowing full well that the consulted schools have said they cannot meet need. This is not a minor procedural issue. It goes to the heart of the child’s right to appropriate education. An EHCP issued with incorrect or incomplete consultation evidence is not a lawful plan. It is a plan built on fiction, and it places the child at risk of being placed somewhere that cannot meet their needs.
When an LA refuses to take consultations seriously, misrepresents the responses, or withholds them entirely, parents are left with very few options. In most cases, the next step is Tribunal. The SEND Tribunal exists precisely because these situations arise: when the LA’s decision is flawed, when the evidence has been ignored, or when the process has not been followed. Tribunal is not a failure of the parent. It is a safeguard against unlawful decision‑making.
Parents should not feel pressured into accepting a plan that is based on wrong information. They should not accept a placement labelled as “preference” when it is the only school that can meet need. And they should not accept an LA’s refusal to share consultation responses. Transparency is not optional. Accuracy is not optional. The law is not optional. Request copies of consultations here
If your LA is ignoring consultation evidence, refusing to share responses, or preparing to issue an EHCP that does not reflect the reality of your child’s needs, you are not overreacting. You are identifying a legal problem. And yes – in these circumstances, Tribunal is the correct and necessary next step.
You may find this letter of interest: LETTER: Asserting Your Parental Preference of Setting – SEN Parent Support Group
Within this blog there are hyperlinks to: Appeal form SEND35 – CAFA S39 – Information on appealing your EHCP Plan – CPD parent webinar on SENDIST Tribunals + link to our closed FB Group. Below you will find a quick view of some of our other resources.
Communicating With School
- LETTER: To School When They Enforce a Part Time Timetable Without Acknowledging Need
- LETTER: To School For Referral To OT/SALT/EP as Part of APDR Cycle
- RESOURCE: Eating Disorders and School Adjustments
- LETTER: Failure To Make Reasonable Adjustments Discrimination
- LETTER: Requesting Reasonable Adjustments
All Things EHCP
- Annual Review During Your Appeal?
- LETTER: To LA When They Fail to Give extra 15 Days After Their Amendments
- LETTER: To LA When They Use Specialist Advisory Service (SAS) INSTEAD of Educational Psychologist During EHCPNA Process
- LETTER: LA Failure To Notify If Issuing the plan
- RESOURCE: Moving Local Authorities
Attendance, Exclusions & Sanctions
Complaints
- LETTER: Formal Complaint for RTC Pause
- LETTER – Enforcing Interim Education S43 with LA + Escalation Letter + Tribunal Request
- LETTER: To School When Whole School Approach To Adjustments Is Not Applied Consistently (IEP or EHCP)
- RESOURCE: LGO Outcomes
- LETTER: Right to Choose Rejection 3 Step Complaints Letters
