Parents of children with special needs have accused Bradford Council of making a U-turn following a landmark legal ruling.

The parents won a four-month battle to have their children's needs reassessed by the Local Education Authority.

But now the solicitor acting for the parents says the council has backtracked on the agreement made before the High Court.

She is calling for the parents to complain directly to the Local Government Ombudsman.

And the solicitor, Elaine Maxwell, will be advising any other parents with statements that are unlawful to take the matter to the High Court should the LEA refuse to issue new ones.

Although the action involved just eight youngsters with major learning disabilities, it opened the floodgates for up to 2,000 new demands for reassessment from parents across the district.

Carol Beardmore, regional development officer for the Down's Syndrome Association, said she was very angry when she heard the news.

"It's a ridiculous situation to be in," said Mrs Beardmore, whose 13-year-old daughter Natalie has Down's Syndrome.

"What has been agreed and settled on is not being adhered to, but Bradford Council needs to know that the parents will not back down.

"It's not an unreasonable request and they just want what's best for their children. They will keep going back to court again and again until they get justice and a decent education.

"I'm just amazed by the council's statement," she added.

"Laws must be adhered to but the council obviously think they can interpret it in their own way.

"They are trying to pass the buck yet again."

The LEA was accused of acting unlawfully in giving mainstream schools the responsibility of deciding how a child's special needs should be met.

Under the old system the LEA was required to issue a statement stipulating the level of support assistance required and specific details of how needs should be met.

But, just seven days after agreeing to settle the matter out of court and carry out reassessments, a spokesman for the council's education directorate told the Telegraph & Argus: "In our view all existing statements meet the requirements."

The spokesman said parents would have to go to a special educational needs tribunal if they were not satisfied with the annual review process.

The council's handling of the case and apparent refusal to accept the terms of the agreement has angered Mrs Maxwell, who says parents should go back to the High Court.

"This, however, would appear to be an unnecessary waste of time and public money to achieve something which should have been accepted by the LEA by now," she said.

"It would appear it is determined to insist that every parent goes through a court procedure merely to obtain what should be theirs by right."

A copy of the settlement schedule, signed by both parties, has been obtained by the T&A.

It states clearly that the responsibility for providing specific details on how a child's special educational needs should be met "lies with the Local Education Authority and not with the school."

Mrs Maxwell says it is also misleading for the Council's education directorate to imply that the parents involved in the High Court action have now accepted that the special educational needs tribunal is the appropriate forum in which to voice concerns.

She said: "It is certainly not the case that they believe their original action should not have been brought in the courts.

"In some cases, parents were actively misled by local authority officials into believing they had had no right of appeal to tribunal, and in the court case itself the authority accepted some of the written information given to parents was misleading and should be withdrawn."

The dispute began in April when the parents of eight children, aged between four and 15, decided to mount a legal challenge after being advised by Bradford Council to appeal individually against its policy via a special needs tribunal.

Their legal challenge stopped short after the council agreed to settle the matter out of court - pledging to carry out new assessments and pay the parents' legal costs, thought to be around £15,000.

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.