It does seem that they fail to get it right for either side in so many cases. TBH, I think it would have been so much better to have left the courts to decide it.

Bloody hell, is this still going on? Better have a drink to celebrate ...

Sounds just like my ex. The CSA have been trying to get him to up his payments for some time now, but he seems to have managed to convince them he is on minimum wage due to a similar sort of arrangement - so I get less than £100 per month. Hmm, a plumber earning minimum wage - highly doubtful in my book. He, meanwhile, runs two vehicles, is always in new clothes, always goes out, has holidays abroad and no mortgage left to pay. £70 a week? Mine works out at less than £20 and there is nothing the CSA will do, despite knowing exactly how much money is going into his bank account, as he is claiming virtually all of the money is going on business "expenses". I, meanwhile, have not been able to work for the last few years due to our child's disabilities and cannot claim JSA etc. as my husband earns too much. Hardly seems fair, does it?

Hi tinks. I've got your message but was busy yesterday helping someone prepare their bundle. I'll have a read through over the weekend and give you some opinions then, if I may.

If you get no joy, you can always post up your submission and I will happily have a look/comment on it for you.

The Statute law you need to rely on is the Disability Living Allowance and Disability Working Allowance Act 1991. I have just had a quick google and these people may be able to help too (but I think they may have geographical restraints): http://www.dls.org.uk/

As this is Tribunal rather than a court, you cannot request a set-aside - only take it to the upper tier of the Tribunal. The more case law you can quote, the better. You can drop the case and then reapply for DLA again (outside the proscribed Statutory time-limits) but, IMO, you are better to at least appeal it to the Upper Tribunal. To discuss the difference of opinion may be considered petty (not by me - Tigs dons her tin helmest) and your time would be more productively spent showing that such and such a point within the SOR contravenes such and such a law. You would also be more likely to win your appeal if you show it contravenes relevant statute, rather than case law. You can certainly make your case strongly about material differences (and it may be informally considered and give weight to your case) but the Upper Tribunal will only over-turn the lower tier's on grounds of law.

Sorry, I obviously didn't put it very clearly in my response - hopefully this will make a little more sense as I've put my responses in a different colour: Just an update. We are now heading for the UTT. I noticed that the FTT judge made a slip of the pen and the wrong review dates were applied to the original decision notice. The notice was sent back to the judge and once AGAIN, she made a mess up with the dates. Surley this proves incompetence - if a mistake is pointed out to a judge surely they would have been completely aware not to make the same mistake again? This is getting beyond a joke and is really dragging on. Now the question is, many may I add! Are the following all errs of law: 1/ delays - infringement of human rights 6(1). Under regulation 56 for corection of slip of the pen? Possibly, but would be hard to prove. 2/Conflict of panel members...on the day of FTT Appeal, I had only had 4 hours sleep (in 2 days) as my son was taken ill in hosp). I was asked if I wanted to carry on. I said 'yes as I cannot cope with the stress any longer'. The doc present said that I should NOT carry on but the judge said 'let her if she wants to'.I wasn't in my right mind to make that decision - I see that now! Unfortunately, the upper tier can only deal with points of law, not points of opinion, and it is only your opinion that this was a conflict and, by your own admission, you agreed to carry on. 3/Not accepting medical evidence - do the tribunal not have to heed this? The tribunal do have to consider all of the evidence, but they do not have to agree with any particular part of it. 4/ Discussing the case and relevant case laws when the appellant is not present.....they did not discuss anything on the day together rather they made the decision when I had left and informed me by letter. This is usual practice. 5/ Made light of material matters and gave weight to immaterial matters. In what way? 6/ Board did not pay heed to relevant case law - reported or commissioners decisions that I had laid out in the submission. This is good grounds for appeal to the upper tribunal and the only thing, IMO, that they would be interested in hearing about. Is it possible to apply for supersession whilst an appeal going on? By appealing to the upper tier, that is, in effect, what you are doing. Any help would be fab - this is taking its toll on me - but I won't give in as I feel my child fits the criteria...... Tinks.

Bookie's post is, as always, brilliant, but I do have a couple of points to add, if I may. 1. I agree that the statement is clearly inadequate and I would suggest that you ask for a re-assessment of your child. If you need help drafting that letter (it can come from the child's parents and not just the school), then please let me know.It may be that your child requires a specialist placement and that mainstream will be unable to meet her needs. 2. I obviously do not know which are of the country you are in, but there is a HUGE problem with CAMHS in certain areas of the country, especially in terms of diagnosis. I would suggest you contact NAS to discuss this with them in order to get a better picture of how the service is performing in your area and perhaps some suggestions of how things can be speeded along. 3. Your (potential) Asperger's Syndrome does not mean that you should be in any way disadvantaged within the SEN and medical systems. In fact, Disability Discrimination laws and the SEN Code of Practice make it explicit that this should not be so. If you do not feel comfortable or able to express to the person you are dealing with at CAMHS or the LEA that you potentially have a disability yourself, I would recommend writing a letter explaining your difficulties and explaining how they can alter things to accommodate them. If there is anything else I can help with from a SEN legal side of things, don't hesitate to shout.

Precisely - I think the word to be used is "discrimination", not "racism". Oh, hang on - that is what I posted about - a quite articulate account of diversity in species and the contribution LGBT people have historically made to the human race, in response to a post stating that nature favoured "hetros", if memory serves. BTW, I didn't even get a CAGBOT message to inform me why this post was unapproved, never-mind the common courtesy of an individual response. To be honest, this is why I rarely post on CAG any more. I browse most days and usually only post or PM when it is something within my speciality which I think I can offer advice on. Too many good people are fed up of being treated like children and vote the only way they can - with their feet.

I do have to say that I found the homophobic comments to be far more likely to be in contravention of site rules that the comments on the Stephen Fry thread (I only glanced at the other one, so I can't comment on that). If the comments were targeting a group of people, then that is obviously wrong. However, I cannot see how a discussion of the merits, or otherwise, of a debate which is widely available on the internet can be construed as anti-religious. I also do not believe that issues such as sexual abuse should be a taboo subject, whether the perpetrator is secular or religious, as by refusing to discuss the matter adds even more to the shame of it's victims. For the record, I contributed to the Stephen Fry thread actively disagreeing with comments made by a poster who is one f the "religious" - and I happen to be one of the "religious" - I am a committed Christian. Oh, and I have a degree in Philosophy and Theology. The antidote to misuse of freedom of speech is more freedom of speech.

I'm sorry if this all reads a little harshly - it isn't meant that way, but it's important to be clear on what the process is and how you need to work within it.

Yeah!!!! Well done girlie - it's a great feeling when you get through all of this, isn't it? Keep arguing over placement - you'll get there xxx

It is - they confirmed the date to me on the phone and in the letters I ahve received they have said that because I have ignored the SD of 08/08, they are going to personally serve it one me - but it wasn't ignored, it was set aside!

Cheers 42man - if you could move it to a new thread (perhaps with a link to this one) it would be grand. I was thinking of writing to them, including a copy of the set-aside, and copy on the Judge and also the OFT. What do you think? I'm a bit hacked off, tbh - they also haven't stopped calling me and I'm feeling somewhat harassed.

I have still got the dismissal from the last one - the thing is, this is actually the same SD from last time, not a new one, I discovered today when I rang back to query the date on it.

AAAARGH!!!! This one is not dead and buried as I thought! I have received several letters from Crapquest stating that I had not replied to their previous Statutory Demand - I phoned them and then got a letter of apology stating that I was correct in stating there had been a set-aside and they would not be pursuing a set-aside. A few more threat-o-grams followed and then today, while a friend was looking after my daughter while I popped out for 10 minutes, someone from scotcall came to the door to serve it. She obviously didn't accept it as she wasn't me (and it was in my previous name, which she didn't know). I have phoned capquest who have now told me that they have re-applied for a Statutory Demand and that if I want a copy of my CCA then I have to resend £1 and a letter of request - I told them this account had been in default with Halifax since February 2007 and that I knew for a fact they didn't have my CCA (as they had put it in writing several times and they had admitted as much to a judge) and was told tough, they are going for another Statutory Demand. Help???

No, just to check whether a company is still at its' offices as it appears they have fleeced my mother for £350 and their phone is no longer working.

Thought that while I was on, I would update this one. I still don't have a valid CCA from Capquest - however, I keep getting letters from them advising me that as I ignored their SD, they would be sending the boys round to serve it personally. I did ring them, and got a letter of apology, but they've sent two more threat-o-grams since then. I'm not particularly bothered, but do like to make Capquest work for the money they are not getting from me - any ideas chaps?

Thanks Wingus - I'm going to get onto the case tomorrow.

repeated post

I don't know if they will actually class it as fraud and, knowing the police, they will say it is a civil matter.

OK, statement as it currently stands is, I'm sorry to say this, rather useless. Bookie is right - it neither quantifies nor qualifies the special educational needs and the provision to meet them. What is in part 5 should be in part 2 and what is in part 6 should be in part 3. Unfortunately, you cannot appeal against the LA refusing to amend the statement following an annual review. therefore, i would suggest you send a letter requesting re-assessment of your child's needs. If they refuse, then it is the tribunal route in the same way as if they had refused an initial Statutory Assessment. If they do the assessment and then refuse to amend the statement, then again, it is the tribunal route. if they do agree to assess and amend, remember that you only have two weeks from initial proposed (amended) statement to request a meeting with an officer of the LA to discuss any amendments that you might like to make. It may seem like an unnecessary battle, but unfortunately many parents think (any statement will do), when the devil is absolutely in the detail. Furthermore, if your child cannot access education when they are not being supported one to one, the LA are failing in their duty of care if they cannot provide an educational environment to ensure you child meets the statutory hours of education for their age.

Some utter, utter see you next tuesday who I have just found out has taken my mother for a ride to the tune of £350 for mis-sold PPI which she doesn't even know that she has got!

Hi Guys Does anyone live in Darlington who fancies going on a little reccy for me within the next couple of days? I would be extremely grateful.