Agenda and draft minutes

RESOLVED that Councillor Byrne be elected as Chair for the duration of the meeting.

There were no apologies for absence received.

Councillor Shuttleworth declared an non-prejudicial interest at agenda item 10, by virtue of the fact that although he is a representative of South Chadderton ward, he did not know the applicant.

RESOLVED that the Home to School Transport Appeal Procedure be noted.

That, in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they contain exempt information under paragraph(s) 1and 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, and it would not, on balance, be in the public interest to disclose the reports.

RESOLVED that, in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they contain exempt information under paragraphs 1 and 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, and it would not, on balance, be in the public interest to disclose the reports.

The SEND Manager presented the case on behalf of the Local Education Authority calling no witnesses in support.  The Appellant attended to present their case.

A Group Solicitor was in attendance who advised on matters of policy and procedure at the Committee. The Committee asked questions of the Local Education Authority.

The Local Education Authority was given the opportunity to sum up their case.  The Appellant was given the opportunity to sum up their case.  The Committee adjourned whilst deliberations took place.

RESOLVED that the Appeal be REFUSED, as it was parental preference for the child to attend the school when there were suitable schools closer to the child’s home and it was reasonable to expect the child to walk to school with parental support.

The SEND Manager presented the case on behalf of the Local Education Authority calling no witnesses in support.  The Appellant attended the meeting accompanied by a friend and Oldham SENDIAS Service to present their case.

A Group Solicitor was in attendance who advised on matters of policy and procedure at the Committee. The Committee asked questions of the Local Education Authority.

The Local Education Authority was given the opportunity to sum up their case.  The Appellant was given the opportunity to sum up their case.  The Committee adjourned whilst deliberations took place.

During the meeting the LEA offered the Appellant the provision of transport until the end of the academic year and the reimbursement of relevant travel expenses to date.  The Appellant agreed to accept this offer and as a result asked to withdraw her appeal.

RESOLVED that the Appeal be Withdrawn, as the Appellant accepted the LEA’s offer of the provision of transport until the end of the academic year and the reimbursement of relevant travel expenses. 

The SEND Manager presented the case on behalf of the Local Education Authority calling no witnesses in support.  The Appellant did not attend to present their case.

A Group Solicitor was in attendance who advised on matters of policy and procedure at the Committee. The Committee asked questions of the Local Education Authority.

The Committee adjourned whilst deliberations took place.

RESOLVED that the Appeal be REFUSED as it was reasonable to expect the child to walk to school with parental support as necessary, and that child be referred to the Mental Health Team and Positive Cycles for support and assistance. 

The SEND Manager presented the case on behalf of the Local Education Authority calling no witnesses in support.  The Appellant did not attend the meeting. 

A Group Solicitor was in attendance who advised on matters of policy and procedure at the Committee. The Committee asked questions of the Local Education Authority.

The Local Education Authority was given the opportunity to sum up their case.  The Committee adjourned whilst deliberations took place.

RESOLVED that the Appeal be REFUSED, as it was reasonable to expect the child to walk to school with parental support as necessary and the Appellant be recommended to accept the offer of Travel Training for the child.