Education archive 2006-2007

Archive has 13 results

  • Lady Margaret School, Parsons Green (05A05670)

    Report Upheld School admissions 20-Mar-2007

    Summary: The admission procedures at Lady Margaret School in Parsons Green, London, were so flawed that it was impossible to determine how places had been allocated.

  • Rosebery School, Epsom (06A03333)

    Report Upheld School admissions 06-Feb-2007

    Summary: Appeals against refusals of places at Rosebery School, Epsom, were very poorly handled. The Ombudsman upheld a mother's complaint about the handling of her appeal, finding a number of procedural defects. As her daughter was committeed to another school and did not want a rehearing of the appeal, the Ombudsman recommended that the School apologise, pay £250 compensation, and thoroughly review its procedures to ensure compliance with government guidance.

  • London Borough of Waltham Forest (05A12278)

    Report Upheld Special educational needs 15-Jan-2007

    Summary: 'Ms Naylor' (not her real name for legal reasons) complained about the way that the Council dealt with the special educational needs of her son, 'Scott'.

  • Essex County Council (05A01826)

    Report Upheld Special educational needs 04-Dec-2006

    Summary: 'John Moore' (not his real name for legal reasons) has learning difficulties and emotional and behavioural problems after experiencing neglect and abuse. He has the needs of a much younger child. He was looked after by Essex County Council and had a statement of special educational needs. With the help of his advocate and solicitor, he complained about both Councils following a decision to move him to a residential placement in Kent.

  • Kingsbury High School, Brent (05A11622)

    Report Upheld School admissions 28-Sep-2006

    Summary: 'Mr Egeh' (not his name for legal reasons) complained that the Appeal Panel established by the Governors of Kingsbury High School wrongly refused his appeal against the decision to refuse the admission of four of his children to the school.

  • Staffordshire County Council (05B00448)

    Report Upheld School admissions 21-Sep-2006

    Summary: 'Mr and Mrs Sheringham' and 'Mr and Mrs Harewood' (not their real names for legal reasons) complained that the Council acted unreasonably by refusing to admit their children to 'Newton Nursery School' even though places were available, and that the Council's policy on nursery admissions is unreasonable. The complainants consider that they should have the right to choose which nursery their children attend and that access to maintained nursery schools should not be limited to a maximum of three terms.

  • Surrey County Council (05A13627)

    Report Upheld Special educational needs 13-Sep-2006

    Summary: 'Ms Davis' (not her real name for legal reasons) complains that the Council delayed in the assessment and statementing process for her son, 'John', who has learning difficulties, and that its communication with her during this process was inadequate.

  • London Borough of Lambeth (05B11513)

    Report Upheld Special educational needs 17-Jul-2006

    Summary: 'Mrs Harris' (not her real name for legal reasons) has a son, 'David', who has learning difficulties and health problems he finds embarrassing. He was bullied at school and, on 31 January 2005, he was attacked and robbed by two boys there. Mrs Harris withdrew him from school.Mrs Harris complained that the Council failed to provide education for David following his withdrawal from school.

  • London Borough of Wandsworth (05B01598)

    Report Upheld Special educational needs 06-Jul-2006

    Summary: 'Miss Ash' complains about the lack of educational provision by the London Borough of Wandsworth for her son, 'Scott', who has special educational needs.

  • St Clement Danes School, Chorleywood (06A00825)

    Report Upheld School admissions 29-Jun-2006

    Summary: 'Mrs Grant' (not her real name for legal reasons) sought a place for her son at the School in Year 10. Because this was outside the normal secondary transfer process, the School handled this under its casual admission procedure. The Governors of the School refused to accept an application because their casual admissions policy prevented parents applying for a place more than once. Unsuccessful applicants who were still interested in a place were kept on a continuing interest list and not allowed to reapply. The operation of the Governors' policy resulted in Mrs Grant being denied her legal rights both to apply for a place and to have an independent appeal if the application was unsuccessful.