Parent Loses Reimbursement Claim After Years of Silence with District

What Happened

Student is a teenager with epilepsy who had been found eligible for special education under speech-language impairment and other health impairment categories while briefly enrolled in Upland Unified. Starting in fifth grade, her parents voluntarily placed her in private parochial schools — first Our Lady of the Assumption (OLA), then Pomona Catholic — where she received no special education services. In spring 2008, Parent requested that the District assess Student and offer her a FAPE. The District refused, incorrectly insisting that assessment was the responsibility of the school district where OLA was located (Claremont Unified), not the District where Student lived. After a flurry of letters in 2008, all communication between Parent and District stopped. Parent filed no due process complaint, no compliance complaint, and sent no further written requests to the District regarding Student for nearly four years.

In July 2012, Parent finally filed for due process, seeking reimbursement for Student's private school tuition at OLA (2009-2010), summer services at Lindamood-Bell (summer 2010), and tuition at Pomona Catholic (2010-2011). Parent argued the District's refusal to assess Student denied her a FAPE and that the statute of limitations should not apply because the District had misled her. The District argued the claims were time-barred and that Student had not been harmed because she was performing well academically without any special education services.

What the ALJ Found

The 2009-2010 claims were filed too late. California's special education law requires parents to file a due process complaint within two years of when they knew — or should have known — the facts supporting their claim. Parent knew as early as May 2008 that the District was refusing to assess Student. The complaint was not filed until July 2012, well outside the two-year window. Parent argued the District misled her by not telling her it was legally required to assess Student. The ALJ rejected this, explaining that the statute of limitations runs from when a parent knows the facts of a potential claim — not from when they learn the legal theory behind it. Parent also could not claim the District withheld required information; the District had repeatedly provided procedural safeguards notices and written explanations of its position. Because Parent and her advocate admittedly believed from 2008 onward that the District had an obligation to assess, there was no excuse for the late filing.

The 2010-2011 claims failed on the merits and on equitable grounds. Even setting aside timing, the ALJ found Student simply did not demonstrate she needed special education. Student was earning Honor Roll and High Honor Roll grades at her private schools, passing all her college preparatory classes, and functioning like a typical student — all without any special education services. The ALJ found no evidence that Student required specialized instruction to access her education. Because the procedural violation (failure to assess) only matters legally if it actually harms the student, and Student showed no harm, the claim failed.

The ALJ also found Parent's conduct independently barred reimbursement. From October 2008 to July 2012, Parent never sent a single written request to the District for an assessment or FAPE offer, never notified the District which schools Student was attending, and never updated the District on Student's educational progress. Appearing at school board meetings to criticize District spending policies was not a substitute for the specific written notice the law requires. The District reasonably concluded Student was simply a privately placed student with no pending FAPE request.

What Was Ordered

1. Student's requests for reimbursement for OLA tuition during the 2009-2010 school year were denied as time-barred.
2. Student's requests for reimbursement for Lindamood-Bell summer services were denied.
3. Student's requests for reimbursement for Pomona Catholic tuition during the 2010-2011 school year were denied.
4. The District prevailed on all issues heard and decided in this matter.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. The clock starts running when you learn the facts, not when you learn the law. If your district refuses to assess your child, you have two years from that refusal to file for due process — not two years from when you find a lawyer or a favorable court decision that confirms your legal position. Waiting to build a stronger case can mean losing your case entirely.

2. Silence can be treated as abandonment of your FAPE request. If you stop communicating with the District in writing about your child's needs, the District may reasonably conclude you are no longer seeking a FAPE. Even if you believe the District wronged you, you must keep making written requests and notifying the District in writing whenever you place your child in a private school because FAPE is unavailable.

3. Procedural violations only win if you can show actual harm. A district's failure to assess is a serious problem, but it only entitles a student to relief if the failure actually hurt the student — for example, by denying needed services or blocking parents from participating in educational decisions. If your child is thriving academically without services, it becomes very hard to prove harm.

4. Notice to the school board is not the same as notice to special education staff. Speaking at public school board meetings — even repeatedly — does not legally notify the District that you want an assessment or FAPE offer for your child. Always send written requests directly to the District's special education director and keep copies.