JMK

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-launches-national-conversation-on-send Government launches national conversation on SEND Government acts on commitment to put parents’ experiences at the heart of SEND reform through new public engagement campaign. For those parents interested, please see link to the Govt website The London event is booked out but there remains spaces for the online events including today and next week

Thank you

Hi, I was just wondering what experiences any of you have had in relation to an Independent Panel review relating to the Permanent Exclusion of a SEN child. 1. General experience Any experiences, positive or negative, in general? 2. Clerks Associates UK Any experience of this entity acting as an "independent clerk" to an Independent Review Panel in a matter involving a Permanent Exclusion of a SEN pupil, also involving discrimination under the Equality Act 2010. There is limited publicly available information with regards to this "independent clerk"; however, I can see from their Annual Report & Accounts at Companies House that they are a small, privately owned organisation. I am very concerned that there is a clear and material risk that they are highly dependent for their revenues and cash flow from the business that they receive from the school and its parent Trust (which has 9 schools in total under its management) who have appointed them. I also note that the Trust has a material employee relations dispute with their staff over underpayment of maternity pay whilst materially increasing the salaries of the highest paid Trust executives and other highly paid staff (presumably the Head Teachers). https://southwarknews.co.uk/news/community/teachers-at-six-charter-schools-walk-out-in-first-of-four-strike-days-planned-for-this-month/ Given the current situation, we have no choice but to engage in this process of an Independent Panel Review; however, we are concerned as to various elements including this one which is a key role in providing independence. 3. Independent SEN expert We have the right to an independent SEN expert to review the matter and provide their opinion to the Independent Review Panel. The concept is that this person is supposedly acting "independently" and also solely in respect of the SEN elements of the matter. We do not however know who this person is, their experience or level of independence. The last information that I can find in the public domain about the effectiveness of an Independent SEN expert is a UK govt report from 2014 which portrays a very mixed experience for parents. Hence, we are seeking to understand if anyone has any more recent experience of an Independent SEN expert in relation to an Independent Panel Review. Many thanks for any thoughts that you have based on your experience. For reasons of confidentiality, it is perhaps better to send any replies to me directly. Many thanks

https://www.assistancedogs.org.uk/information-hub/assistance-dogs-emotional-support-dogs-and-therapy-dogs/ hello i’d be interested to understand if anyone.has experience of Assistance Dogs especially for autistic children of different ages for emotional support and therapy There was a prior thread on this topic on EDF 10 hrs ago but it had limited experiences and there was a (claimed) change in UK legislation in 2019. Whilst the industry appears unregulated/unlicensed, there are several providers (approx 15, perhaps more) who claim to have fully trained dogs or say that they can help families to train a puppy/young dog over the 18-24 months. The latter obviously comes with a need for strong commitment to the challenge. Costs for a fully trained assistance dog are quoted at £13-15k albeit they claim £23k total cost to train the dog. On the one hand, this could potentially be a useful solution for some families if such a dog was truly trained as their websites claim and such a dog was accepted in public places and schools etc… On the other hand, I don’t think that I’ve ever seen an assistance dog of this type or in this context (only for a blind or partially sighted person) and hence a real risk of fraud or exploitation! The SEN challenge for families coupled with limited resources in schools or from local authorities or the NHS as well as the extremely challenging experience of many families with schools offering little or no support or making the situation worse leaves a big risk of lots of different types of fraud and or exploitation in this area.

Having current and relevant experience of both Charter North and Charter East with regards to their conduct towards SEN pupils and their families, I would say that their conduct and behaviour is wholly lacking in understanding as well as making no effort to make reasonable adjustments for the SEN pupil as legally required under Equality Act 2010. Furthermore, I believe that their behaviour is wholly illegal. According to data from Ambitious About Autism, unfortunately that is not uncommon We have separately requested legal advice as to whether or not the specific conduct of the school and certain teachers constitutes a criminal offence under the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 or other legislation. These links have some very good materials to assist parents: https://www.ambitiousaboutautism.org.uk https://www.ambitiousaboutautism.org.uk/understanding-autism/education/exclusions-know-your-rights https://www.ipsea.org.uk https://sossen.org.uk Also, this link specifically for girls with autism as this tends to be diagnosed at a much later stage than boys and requires different support and reasonable adjustments that the neither of the policies nor behaviours of Charter East or Charter North reflect. https://autisticgirlsnetwork.org Helen Hayes MP for Dulwich & West Norwood and whose constituency includes Charter North is Chair of the Education Committee at the Houses of Parliament They published this report on the SEND crisis on 18 Sept 2025 https://committees.parliament.uk/work/8684/solving-the-send-crisis/ Ellie Reeves (Rachel Reeves’ sister and formerly Chair of the Labour Party) is the MP for Lewisham West and East Dulwich - the constituency under which Charter East falls I would urge any parents who are concerned about their children, whether SEN or not, who attend Charter North or Charter East to write to your MP canvassing their support and requesting that they write to their respective school on this subject, referencing this report of the Education Committee and the failures of Charter East and Charter North with regards to SEN, their illegal behaviour and soliciting a plan of action from them to immediately stop such behaviour and support SEN pupils with reasonable adjustments as required under the Equality Act 2010. Even if your child is not SEN, the school implementing the correct and legally required procedures materially improves the school environment for all pupils, teachers and non-teaching staff. Often the reasonable adjustments can actually be relatively minor but have a very material benefit. In our experience, there have been one or two teachers who have shown this with very positive results; however, this is the opposite of the institutional approach of both schools which is wholly negative, unsupportive and often illegal. In addition to EHCPs, there is also huge pressure at CAMHS and insufficient resource to support all cases and meet demand. Even if families and their child are lucky to get access to it, there remains very long wait lists to access treatment. The same is true in the private sector. A proactive and practical, common sense approach to SEN in this manner by Charter North and Charter East would also help to reduce pressure on CAMHS The latest tragedy last week at Charter North means that this is more pressing than ever.

Small, light coloured hatchback, no right headlight working turning right from Dulwich Village into East Dulwich Grove hit female cyclist full on, did not stop, accelerated away and sped off up East Dulwich Grove @ 9.52pm on Tuesday 24 June Quite possible that the car had driven through the centre of Dulwich Village 9:45-50pm passing in front of The Real Greek, Roca, Crown & Greyhound etc… The cyclist was badly injured thanks to the pedestrians and car drivers who stopped and helped Please contact the Police with any details if you witnessed the accident (some people left before the police arrived) or if you may have seen the car (Small, light coloured hatchback, no right headlight working) in Dulwich Village, East Dulwich Grove or nearby streets (Townley Road, Lordship Lane)

Southwark Council Parking Enforcement Corrupt Practices Today, Southwark Council Parking Enforcement is illegally giving parking tickets to cars that are legally parked on Stradella Road at the end near to Halfmoon Lane. Firstly, there are several bays at the beginning of Stradella Road that have no parking suspension sign. Cars are parking legally and are being given parking tickets illegally. Southwark Council Parking Enforcement officers have been made aware of this illegal behaviour and shown that they are no parking suspension notices in those bays and or in that part of the road; however, they continue to issues tickets illegally and cars continue to park in those bays unaware that they are (apparently) suspended because there is no notice to say such, in fact there is a notice to say 1hr parking between 8:30am and 6pm. Further up Stradella Road, approximately 250+ metres, several cars were legally parked and there were no parking suspension notices; however, they were illegally issued with parking tickets. Subsequently, an agent for Southwark Council was putting up parking suspension notices in this part of the road at around 1:30-2pm but only after the legally parked cars had been illegally issued with illegal car parking tickets to try and make it look legal. This is clearly a deeply corrupt scam being undertaken by Southwark Council and its agents. It has been separately reported to the police, local councillors and the local MP. It will also be reported to Southwark Council, however, they are uncontactable until next week. Similar corrupt and illegal behaviour by Southwark Parking enforcement officers was also clearly identified in Halfmoon Lane. It is quite likely to have occurred in other adjacent roads. Photographic and video evidence of these corrupt practices have been provided to the police to investigate and root out corruption in Southwark Council.

Wondering if any parents have positive experiences from either Charter East or Charter North for SEN children? The overall sentiment appears to be very negative Also, has anyone a positive experience of an Education Advocate similar to the one advertising here? what’s the point of an Education Advocate if the school either has no resource or a poor culture when it comes to SEN support for the kids? An EA can’t change that

Reported to the police Amongst other crimes in these roads, several cars have been stolen recently, almost always family cars and often with child or baby seats creating significant inconvenience for the families concerned equally, at least 5 stolen cars, again family style, have been dumped in these roads over the past few months The police have advised that they are commonly used for ferrying drugs around from place to place and seeking to be inconspicuous and that the lack of CCTV that would be present around the Dulwich Village / Court Lane junction and could be used to identify such behaviour/people as well as the quiet nature of the location have encouraged such behaviour by the criminals

Male acting very suspiciously on Court Lane and adjacent roads (Calton Avenue, Gilkes Crescent, Woodwarde Road etc…) There’s been a very significant increase in crime on these roads and adjacent roads due to the Southwark Council LTN, even more so with the recent works that are ongoing Residents and their property are being deliberately and negligently put at risk by Southwark Council’s actions and criminals are deliberately targeting this area and exploiting it given significantly reduced flow of people, much quieter, poor lighting, easy getaway and no access for the police The closure of the junction at Court Lane, Dulwich Village and Calton Avenue is a boon to thieves and criminals making the adjacent streets much less safe. The workmen have put in place wrought iron bollards in the middle of the road on Court Lane and Calton Avenue which stops police and other emergency services from accessing from Dulwich Village This materially increases the risks to residents and crime has gone up materially as a result The workmen say that they are under strict instructions from Southwark Council to put the wrought iron bollards in the middle of the road and that there’s nothing that they can do it alao stops ambulances and fire engines from getting through

a simple Google search renders multiple articles from mainstream media incl. BBC, Sky News, Financial Times on this topic since at least 2008 and also a discussion in a House of Commons Parliamentary Select Committee The original post is very clear and precise in requesting advice and people’s experience of the act of the misreporting of crime and also collusion in this act by the agencies and democratically elected representatives who are supposed to represent the interests of their communities. It is not about the criminal act itself. Met Police misreports intimate searches of children https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-65700511 Sky News: One in Five of All Crimes not Recorded by the Police https://news.sky.com/story/one-in-five-of-all-crimes-not-recorded-by-police-10382167 Financial Times: Serious crime misreported by police https://www.ft.com/content/9ee810ce-a0f1-11dd-82fd-000077b07658 https://hmicfrs.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/news/news-feed/victims-let-down-by-poor-crime-recording/ House of Commons, Commons Select Committee, Public Administration Caught red-handed: Why we can't count on Police Recorded Crime statistics - Public Administration Committee https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmpubadm/760/76007.htm

Hi does anyone have experience of the police misreporting crime? I have very recent experience of them misreporting a crime of one of the most serious and violent types in this area and rather misclassifying it as a very low level, ordinary type of crime and one that has little to no victims. Furthermore, the Police have then immediately closed the case and said that there’s nothing that they can do even though they haven’t undertaken some of the most basic investigative procedures such as interviewing witnesses, checking CCTV etc… Southwark Council who also have a material role in this have are complicit with the police in this deliberate misreporting of a very serious and violent crime. The local council representatives are also complicit Each of these bodies say that there is nothing that they can do. As a minimum, it seems as though all these parties deliberately want to misreport a very serious and violent crime as a very low category crime and then close the case immediately because they want their crime stats to look good. The Independent Office for Police Conduct merely states that they will refer any complaint to the police force in question who will investigate it themselves in the first instance! Separately, the Southwark Council Serious Violence & Duty Strategy 2023-24 states that: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/242858/Serious-Violence-Duty-Strategy-2023-2024.pdf - Southwark has the 10th highest rate of serious violence in London - the five year trend is upward - the Police had identified 43 Organised Crime Gangs in Southwark at Dec 2022 - that “the illegal drug market was worth millions to the local economy” - implying that they didn’t wish to stop it as it would be very bad to the local economy!

The police will not investigate a Safeguarding issue at a school as it is not a criminal matter per se and do not have the available resource The local authority does not have any oversight or regulatory authority for an Academy school A complaint to Ofsted will initially be answered within 30 working days or 42 calendar days A complaint may be made directly to the school or to a parent Trust of such a school; however, they determine how it will be processed and by whom Separately, under the UK Government Guidance dated September 2024 "Keeping Children Safe In Education 2024: Statutory Guidance for Schools & Colleges" It is stated in Part One: Information for all School & College Staff "Part 1, 2: In order to fulfil this responsibility effectively, all practitioners should make sure their approach is child centred. This means they they should consider, at all times, what is in the best interests of the child" Other than the two routes outlined above, there appears to be no alternative way to ensure that a school abides by their Duty of Care at all times and in a way whereby such breach can be immediately or quickly cured and in a manner which is in the best interests of the child at all times unless someone is able to refer to an alternative route?

Thank you for your reply There is no obligation on Charter North Dulwich to report this material Safeguarding incident in July 2023 to Ofsted The obligation on any person or body regulated by Ofsted to self report relates to something called a “Significant Event” However there is no definition of a “Significant Event” The regulated party, in this case, Charter North Dulwich, has complete discretion in how they define if a matter constitutes a “Significant Event” and therefore whether or not to report such a matter to Ofsted The letter to the parents in July 2023 from Charter North Dulwich reporting the material Safeguarding issue is very clear as to the steps the school is taking to address the matter. Equally, the letter very clearly makes no reference to the school reporting this material Safeguarding incident to Ofsted. There is no other evidence in the public domain that Charter North Dulwich reported this material Safeguarding incident to Ofsted.

Hello I'm keen to understand the differing view of parents of pupils at Charter North Dulwich with regards to the school's approach to dealing with bullying, misogyny, threatening, violent and abusive behaviour including physical assault and Safeguarding in general. And whether parents believe that Charter North Dulwich meets its Duty of Care obligation to its pupils at all times? In July 2023 it was communicated to parents that there was a very material failure of Charter North Dulwich's Safeguarding rules and procedures . The Designated Safeguarding Lead was immediately removed from this role. There is a reference in the September 2023 Minutes of the Board of Governors that there will be a full discussion of Safeguarding at the next meeting which was held on 23 November 2023. No Minutes of the Board of Governors Meeting on 23 November 2023 are publicly available on the website of Charter North Dulwich but Minutes of subsequent meetings are available. Charter North Dulwich has had 5 different Designated Safeguarding Leads in the last 3 years. Do parents believe that Charter North Dulwich has actually improved its Safeguarding rules and procedures in practice or do parents believe that Charter North Dulwich has an institutional problem with its Safeguarding? Are parents worried about their child's safety and security at Charter North Dulwich in the light of the material failure of its Safeguarding policy and procedures in July 2023? What is their experience and the experience of their child since that time? Do parents believe that Charter North Dulwich and its Board of Governors are deliberately hiding the information with regards to its material Safeguarding issue by not publishing the Minutes of the Board of Governors Meeting on 23 November 2023? Thoughts and experiences welcome.

Just to note that, according to Asthma UK and the British Lung Foundation, EV's are not the panacea to climate change or local air quality issues and will make particulate emissions worse which they classify at "the most dangerous pollutant for human health" "Whilst the proliferation of electric or zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) is likely to reduce NO2 concentrations, it will not improve air quality in its entirety. This is because a significant amount of PM2.5 is released from tyre, brake and road abrasion, rather than through exhaust emissions. The government’s own air quality expert group notes that “particles from brake wear, tyre wear and road surface wear currently constitute 60% and 73% (by mass), respectively, of primary PM2.5 and PM10 emissions from road transport, and will become more dominant in the future”, as vehicles become larger and heavier.iii" Written evidence, Asthma UK and the British Lung Foundation (CCE0012) https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/41541/pdf/ The point also applies to many popular cars incl. 4x4s sixe to their size and weight; however, taking spiteful and arbitrary action as Southwark Council is doing with the CPZ is not the answer but certainly discriminatory and likely to be unlawful too

Rollflick unfortunately, you continue to put forward incorrect and false information The Traffic Management Act 2004 that you state "is section 72 that enabled decriminalisation of traffic offences" was in fact the 3rd in a series of acts covering this area The RTA 1991 was the first statute which decriminalised certain traffic offences, including parking enforcement Continuing to put forward incorrect and false information which deliberately misleads others only serves to undermine your position

perhaps...but the democratic way to introduce a policy is to hold a consultation which provides residents with the option to object to the introduction of a CPZ The unilateral imposition of a CPZ in the manner proposed by Southwark Council is neither democratic nor fair It is however underhand, duplicitous and lacking in any integrity. I wonder and have posted elsewhere as to whether or not it is legally valid - it may or may not be but there appears to be at least 5 pieces of legislation that apply to this area of law and requires a competent lawyer to opine. The proponents of this policy are also those that argue for a "Just transition" - yet they also support the most egregious and regressive of taxes for such a transition which are the subsidies levied on all (primarily) electricity and gas bills to pay for renewable energy such that the least well off in society pay for it. In simple terms, this is because the renewable subsidies apply equally to each unit of electricity or gas consumed by everyone. They are neither means tested nor proportional and so the least well off pay significantly more than the better off. That is not to say that renewable subsidies are illegal, bad or not required - but the fact is that are highly regressive and also deliberately hidden so that people don't understand who is paying them, how and importantly, who's disadavantaged. Don't expect any of Labour, Lib Dems, SNP or the Tories to put that in the campaign leaflets or ever to explain it to the public.

Rollflck you seem very confused, aka muddled As stated clearly in the Act, it's a civll matter not a criminal matter Secondly, the Act clearly states the local authority is obliged to follow the guidance published by the UK govt i.e. this is a legal obligation The transport plan may well be required by the GLA however, there are at least 4 or 5 other pieces of UK legislation that apply here incl. HA, RTA, NRSWA and the IA It is not surprising that there could be conflicting legal obligations and council policies. The fact the Southwark has a plan and the Mayor has approved it does not mean that is is legally compliant with all UK legislation. Selectively and subjectively choosing something that supports your position only serves to undermine any argument that you may have as it's clearly neither objective nor grounded in law. Further evidenced by your last point as research of modal shift is irrelevant to any judicial review as this is only concerned with a question of law and specifically whether or not a local authority (Southwark Council in this case) is acting outside of its legal authority. Hence, I refer back to my original post wondering if there's a competent lawyer who understands the web of legislation who can opine.

it's a question of law, not of implementation a quick, non-legal review suggest that it is clearly not in line with the UK govt's "Statutory guidance for local authorities in England on civil enforcement of parking contraventions" https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-enforcement-of-parking-contraventions/guidance-for-local-authorities-on-enforcing-parking-restrictions In particular, just to cite two examples of non-compliance: 1. it is not fair to the motorist 2. it is principally a revenue raising exercise The London Mayor's transport plan is secondary to UK legislation and must be in compliance with that, not the other way round

is there a lawyer who can advise at a high level as to the legal basis upon which Southwark Council can implement a CPZ such as this and the routes available to challenge it, if any? It strikes me as possibly being "ultra vires" but that's a question of law And certainly disproportionate to anything to do with traffic management thanks in advance