If we register our child through the standard secondary school admission process, will their EHCP automatically cease?

Our adopted, Year 6, daughter has an EHCP with VI as the main need. We chose a secondary school for her with a specialist VI unit, in a different county. They can definitely meet needs but have yet to agree to the placement. If we went through the standard admissions, she would be given a place in our chosen school as she is a previously looked-after child. But we have been told by our Local Authority that if we do that, the EHCP will cease. Is that correct, would that be a legal move?

Why are schools required to evidence that they have exhausted all available resources before the LA will make a decision regarding placement or the transition from a school-based IDP to an LA-maintained IDP?

Placement: If the LA suggests that the parent must first re-register the child at another mainstream school, what are the parent’s rights in responding to that recommendation?

Final EHCP issued with nothing named in I nor 'type' of placement nor provision set out in F ( EOTAS ). Appeal hearing 5/11/25 ( in 2 days time! )

Am I right in saying the LA have acted unlawfully by issuing a final without a placement/type/eotas? This is the very simple reason I have lodged the appeal which has taken 11 months - during which time my now 19 year old young person is highly unlikely to engage in anything whatsoever and are NEET.

are there particular rules statutory assessment

06.02 Is there a prescribed form of EHCP?

09.3385 Do the rules preventing removal of a child’s name from the roll of a special school somehow prevent a parent from removing their child from the school?

Who is responsible for the quality of commissioned provision in England (whether or not it is meeting need)?

If a AP is named and it is just meeting identified need, but the quality is poor, who would be responsible for ensuring the quality improves?

Can you go to judicial review and to first tier tribunal?

(In)appropriate Local Authority attendance at the Annual Review

My daughter’s EHCP Annual Review (AR) takes place one week today. Per the norm, the LA has been invited to attend. We’d not had an indication one way or the other if they would; our LA doesn’t usually attend. Today, her college received a phone call from the caseworker saying that they would / could not attend, but their superior would (we do not know yet if this is virtual or in person).
The named person they propose was the lead and very adversarial protagonist on the LA’s behalf for a Lower Tribunal hearing (which we ‘won’), a subsequent appeal (which was also won), and then made an LA appeal to the Upper Tribunal, which we again won, which resulted in the (very successful) placement at the current college.
My questions are:
1) Is it permissible that an LA representative be substituted at this late stage and can we ask for an alternative person?
2) Can we request that the LA does not allow this person to be involved in our daughter’s AR, or indeed any aspect of her ongoing engagement with the LA SENAT?
We feel threatened and intimidated by the named person’s involvement because:
a) their extremely adversarial approach to the tribunals caused a lot of pain, distress, delays and expense – both to us, and to the public purse.
b) their various submissions and representations were found to be at best irregular, at their base level they were incorrect and manipulative, which the judge(s) concurred with (in other words, they were not faithful and truthful, but this is of course tricky territory).
c) we believe they are very prejudiced against us as a family.
d) my daughter is vulnerable and is still scarred by the tribunal process and we do not want this person to have any contact with her.
Thank you in advance for any guidance at this difficult moment, served on us at very short notice.