Your journey is not a straight line. And that is okay.
🔧 We are improving how Awareverse is organised. Some pages may have moved. Ask if you cannot find something.
This month we're markingADHD Awareness Month · Dyslexia Awareness Week · Dyspraxia / DCD Awareness Week · Selective Mutism Awareness Month · and more · Black History Month (UK)Explore our guides →
Need to tell someone something? Worried about a child or adult? 💜 Talk to us 🚨 Crisis help
💜

SEND Law Hub

SEND Code of Practice 2015
Chapter 11: Resolving Disagreements

When the system fails, you have the right to challenge it. Mediation, the SEND Tribunal, disability discrimination claims, judicial review and the Local Government Ombudsman all exist for this reason. This chapter explains every route and how to use them.

Quick facts
  • Source: SEND Code of Practice, January 2015
  • Key legislation: Children and Families Act 2014 Sections 51 to 57, Equality Act 2010, Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007
  • Last reviewed: June 2026
Reform update — February 2026

The 'Every Child Achieving and Thriving' Education White Paper was published in February 2026, alongside a companion document 'SEND Reform: Putting Children and Young People First'. These introduce significant proposed changes including Individual Support Plans, a new three-tier support model, and Specialist Provision Packages. The law documented here — the Children and Families Act 2014 and SEND Code of Practice 2015 — remains in full force until legislation and the updated Code are brought into effect. We will update each page as official text is published. Important — May 2026: The Children's Wellbeing and Schools Act 2025 received Royal Assent on 20 May 2026. Some provisions are now in force. The core SEND framework — the Children and Families Act 2014 and SEND Code of Practice 2015 — continues to apply. See our SEND Reform 2026 page for a full breakdown.

Chapter 11: Resolving Disagreements

Disagreements with local authorities and schools are common. This chapter sets out every legal route available — from informal resolution and mediation through to Tribunal, disability discrimination claims, LGO complaints, Secretary of State complaints and judicial review.

View Children and Families Act 2014

§ 11.3 to 11.16 Disagreement resolution and informal routes

What the law says

Children and Families Act 2014 Section 52. Code of Practice § 11.3 to 11.16

Local authorities must make disagreement resolution services available to parents and young people regardless of whether they have an EHCP. These services must be independent of the local authority. They are voluntary — using them does not affect the right to Tribunal.

Disagreement resolution applies to disputes about school SEN support as well as EHCP disputes, and to disputes involving health and social care as well as education.

In plain English

Before escalating to Tribunal, there are faster, lower-stress options. Disagreement resolution services can facilitate structured conversations between families and LAs or schools without formal proceedings. They are free to use and do not close off Tribunal rights.

Use them early — but never let informal routes be used to delay a Tribunal appeal past the deadline.

What to watch out for
  • Informal resolution dragging on past Tribunal appeal deadlines
  • LA using informal routes as a delay tactic — always track appeal deadlines in parallel
  • Disagreement resolution services that are not genuinely independent
What you can do

Use disagreement resolution for less adversarial disputes. Always track your Tribunal appeal deadlines separately — informal routes do not extend them unless mediation has been formally completed.

§ 11.17 to 11.32 Mediation

What the law says

Children and Families Act 2014 Sections 53 and 54. Code of Practice § 11.17 to 11.32

Before appealing most EHCP decisions to Tribunal, parents and young people must contact a mediation adviser and consider whether mediation is appropriate. If they choose not to mediate, they receive a mediation certificate. The certificate is required before the Tribunal appeal can be submitted.

Mediation does not apply to Section I (school name) appeals — families can go directly to Tribunal on placement decisions without mediation.

In plain English

Mediation is a required step before most Tribunal appeals but it can be declined. Declining still gets you the certificate. The two month Tribunal deadline runs from the LA decision — or from the mediation certificate if you mediate.

What to watch out for
  • Mediation used to delay rather than resolve — if it is not productive, decline and get your certificate
  • Missing the Tribunal deadline while waiting for a mediation appointment
  • Not being told about the certificate requirement
What you can do

Contact a mediation adviser immediately after any appealable LA decision. Do not wait. If you choose not to mediate, request the certificate immediately so you can file the Tribunal appeal.

June 2026 update — mandatory mediation pilot not proceeding

An earlier proposal to pilot mandatory mediation before Tribunal appeals has been confirmed as not proceeding. Mediation remains voluntary. Contacting the mediation service is still required before most Tribunal appeals, but you can decline mediation itself and receive your certificate immediately. Your right to go directly to Tribunal on receipt of the certificate is unchanged.

§ 11.33 to 11.60 SEND Tribunal

What the law says

Children and Families Act 2014 Section 51. Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. Code of Practice § 11.33 to 11.60

The SEND Tribunal (First-tier Tribunal, Special Educational Needs and Disability) hears appeals against most local authority decisions about EHCPs. Appealable decisions include refusal to assess, refusal to issue a plan, the contents of the plan including Sections B, F and I, and decisions to cease a plan.

The appeal must generally be lodged within 2 months of the LA decision, or within 1 month of the mediation certificate if mediation was used after the decision.

The Tribunal can order the LA to carry out an assessment, issue a plan, amend a plan, or reinstate a ceased plan. Its orders are binding.

In plain English

The Tribunal is the most powerful legal remedy available for EHCP disputes. It is independent of the LA. Its orders cannot be ignored. Families win a significant proportion of appeals when they are properly prepared.

Do not be put off by the word Tribunal. Many families represent themselves successfully, especially with support from IPSEA or SOS SEN. The key is tracking deadlines and building a clear evidence base.

What to watch out for
  • Missing the 2 month appeal deadline — it is strict and extensions are rare
  • Waiting too long hoping things will improve — that time could be used to prepare
  • Poor evidence in the appeal — professional reports, progress data and communications are all essential
  • Settling for a compromise that still leaves provision inadequate
What you can do

Contact IPSEA or SOS SEN as soon as you think an appeal is likely. Start gathering evidence before the final decision arrives. Note the deadline from the date of the LA decision, not the date you receive it.

§ 11.61 to 11.75 Disability discrimination claims

What the law says

Equality Act 2010. SEND Code of Practice § 11.61 to 11.75

Schools and LAs must not discriminate against disabled children. This includes direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, and failure to make reasonable adjustments. Disability discrimination claims about schools are heard by the SEND Tribunal.

A disability discrimination claim can run alongside a SEND Tribunal appeal or separately. It applies to admissions, exclusions, and all aspects of school life.

In plain English

If a school treats your disabled child less favourably, fails to make adjustments, or discriminates in any aspect of school life — from access to trips to exclusion decisions — that is potentially unlawful under the Equality Act, entirely separately from SEND rights.

What to watch out for
  • Discriminatory exclusions — disproportionately excluding disabled children for behaviour linked to their disability
  • No reasonable adjustments despite clear need
  • Admissions criteria that indirectly discriminate
  • Treating SEND as the only relevant legal framework when Equality Act duties apply alongside it
What you can do

Document every incident where you believe your child has been treated less favourably because of disability. Consider whether the situation involves both SEN rights and Equality Act rights — both can be pursued. Get support from IPSEA or the Equality Advisory Support Service.

§ 11.76 to 11.84 Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman

What the law says

Local Government Act 1974. Code of Practice § 11.76 to 11.84

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGO) investigates complaints about maladministration by local authorities. In SEND, this typically includes failures to follow proper process, failure to complete EHCPs on time, failure to deliver provision, and failure to conduct annual reviews.

The LGO can require the LA to apologise, pay compensation and take corrective action. It cannot order a specific EHCP outcome — that is the Tribunal's role. But it is a powerful route for procedural failures and loss of provision.

In plain English

The LGO is the right tool when the issue is how the LA behaved, not just what decision it made. Missed deadlines, undelivered provision, lost correspondence and failure to hold reviews are all LGO territory. It is free, accessible, and can result in financial remedy.

What to watch out for
  • The LGO requires internal complaints to be exhausted first — make sure you have done that
  • Time limits — generally 12 months from when you knew about the problem
  • LGO cannot override a Tribunal decision or order the content of a plan
What you can do

Keep a complete paper trail of every missed deadline, every unfulfilled provision commitment, and every procedural failure. Use the LA's formal complaints process first, then escalate to the LGO if the response is inadequate.

§ 11.85 to 11.87 Complaints to the Secretary of State

What the law says

Education Act 1996 Section 496 and 497. Code of Practice § 11.85 to 11.87

The Secretary of State can intervene where a local authority is acting unreasonably or failing to perform a duty. This is a high threshold and rarely used for individual cases — but it is available and should not be overlooked where the failure is systemic.

In plain English

Most individual SEND disputes are better handled through Tribunal or LGO. Secretary of State complaints are most useful where an LA is systematically failing multiple families and you can document a pattern — not just a single case.

What to watch out for
  • Long response times and a high evidential bar
  • The DfE will often redirect to LGO or Tribunal for individual disputes
What you can do

Use this route in combination with others, not instead of them. Evidence of systemic failure — multiple families, sustained periods of failure, documented patterns — strengthens any Secretary of State complaint.

§ 11.88 Judicial review

What the law says

Senior Courts Act 1981. Code of Practice § 11.88

Judicial review is the legal mechanism for challenging a public body's decision as unlawful. It can be used where there is no right of appeal — for example, challenging the lawfulness of a policy rather than an individual EHCP decision. It requires permission, is expensive, and should be pursued with legal advice.

In plain English

JR is not the first port of call for individual EHCP disputes. It is the route when the public body has acted in a way that is fundamentally unlawful — applying an illegal policy, acting irrationally or procedurally improperly — and no other remedy is available or adequate.

What to watch out for
  • Time limits are tight — usually 3 months from the decision being challenged, promptly
  • JR cannot substitute for a Tribunal appeal — exhaust statutory remedies first
  • Cost risk if unrepresented
What you can do

Get specialist legal advice before pursuing JR. SEN specialist solicitors and barristers handle this regularly. Public funding through legal aid may be available in some cases.

What the 2026 white paper adds to dispute resolution

Improved complaints processes — detail to come

'Every Child Achieving and Thriving' — DfE, February 2026

The white paper commits to improving the complaints and escalation processes within the SEND system. The detail of what this means — new processes, timescales or routes — has not yet been published. We will update this page when the consultation on the updated SEND Code of Practice includes specific proposals.

What this means now

Every existing route on this page — mediation, Tribunal, disability discrimination, LGO, Secretary of State, judicial review — remains fully available and unchanged. Do not wait for an improved process that does not yet exist. Use the routes that are available today.

New: Children's Commissioner reports as evidence in disputes

The white paper gives the Children's Commissioner new statutory oversight of SEND reform, including regular public reports identifying failures in the system. Once published, these reports are public documents that families can reference in LGO complaints, Tribunal proceedings and local challenge.

Where a Commissioner report identifies a systemic failure — delayed EHCPs, missing provision, poor AP reintegration — that evidence can support individual complaints. It demonstrates that the failure is documented at national level, not just in your child's case.

Reform misapplication — a new dispute to watch for

As the white paper's proposals become more widely known, local authorities may attempt to apply the new system before it is law. Families may encounter refusals referencing Specialist thresholds, cessations citing the new tier model, or reduced provision justified by forthcoming ISP frameworks. These are unlawful.

All existing dispute resolution routes apply to challenges against this type of premature implementation. A refusal citing the new tier system is still a refusal under Section 36 of the Children and Families Act 2014 — appeal it on that basis.

What stays the same right now

Tribunal routes — unchanged. Mediation requirement — unchanged. Appeal deadlines — unchanged. LGO jurisdiction — unchanged. Disability discrimination routes — unchanged. Secretary of State and judicial review — unchanged. The white paper proposes future improvements; it does not alter any current right of challenge.

Quick reference — dispute routes summary

EHCP disputes

Refusal to assess, plan content, placement, cessation → SEND Tribunal (after mediation contact)

Procedural failures

Missed deadlines, undelivered provision, no reviews → LA complaints then LGO

Disability discrimination

Exclusions, reasonable adjustments, unfair treatment → SEND Tribunal (disability claims)

Unlawful policies

Systemic unlawful practice, no other remedy → Judicial review with specialist legal advice

Previous: Chapter 10 Specific circumstances Back to SEND Law Hub