WBC v A

Mr Leong, Counsel, for WBC Ms Myerscough, Solicitor, for the First Respondent Mother, CA Mr Robertson, Solicitor, for the Second Respondent Father, KA Ms Cox, Legal Executive, for the Third Respondent, RA, acting through his Children's Guardian ____________________

The result of the above was that a care plan was formulated, as well as an updated EHCP, and all parties are in agreement with the provisions of the final care plan and that there should be no order in this case.

The remaining issue for me to determine in this case relates to threshold. As a result of my indicating that a more succinct threshold document could and should be prepared, and in light of concessions made by the parents in relation to the facts pleaded in terms of threshold, the Local Authority prepared a final threshold document which can be found in the bundle at A33-34. This contains 4 factual findings and 2 relating to attribution as follows:

"At the time of the instigation of protective measures (12 th January 2016) RA (DOB) was suffering and likely to suffer significant harm, and that harm was attributable to his being beyond parental control (within the meaning of section 31(2)(b)(ii) of the Act) in that:

On 24 th February 2015, 22 nd March 2015, 3 rd June 2015 and 12 th August 2015, and notwithstanding close supervision, RA sexually assaulted numerous children;