School admissions archive 2020-2021


Archive has 150 results

  • John Spence Community High School (20 002 382)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 05-Oct-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman does not intend to investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful school admissions appeal. This is because he is unlikely to find fault in the way the appeal was conducted and he cannot question the merits of a decision in the absence of fault.

  • Kent County Council (20 002 880)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 02-Oct-2020

    Summary: A parent complained that the Council had not followed its rules for dealing with separate applications for a school place from both of a child’s parents. However the Ombudsman cannot investigate this matter. This is because the school which decided the applications is an academy school, and we have no jurisdiction to consider complaints about academies. In addition, the law says we cannot investigate a complaint about any action by a council concerning a matter which is itself out of our jurisdiction.

  • London Borough of Enfield (20 002 439)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 01-Oct-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the refusal of a place for the complainant’s child at her preferred school for her. This is because there is no evidence that any alleged fault by the Independent Appeal Panel hearing the appeal affected its decision and caused injustice to the complainant.

  • Nottinghamshire County Council (20 003 519)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 01-Oct-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel, and so we cannot question the merits of its decision.

  • The Latymer School, Edmonton (19 018 352)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 30-Sep-2020

    Summary: Miss Y complains the school admission appeal panel did not properly consider her appeal against the School’s decision to refuse to admit her child. The Ombudsman has found fault in the way the appeal was conducted. The School should remedy this fault by arranging a fresh appeal.

  • High Tunstall College of Science (20 004 011)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 30-Sep-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that the School’s Admissions Appeal Panel failed to provide her child with a place at this school. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault which caused her to lose out on a school place.

  • London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (20 003 905)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 29-Sep-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful school admissions appeal. This is because he is unlikely to determine fault and he cannot question the merits of a decision in the absence of fault.

  • London Borough of Ealing (20 003 219)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 29-Sep-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault and so we cannot question the merits of the panel’s decision.

  • Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (19 019 147)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 28-Sep-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman upholds Ms X’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with her request to defer her daughter starting school in the reception year. The Council applied the wrong test in its decision making. It will retake the decision, apologise and make a payment to Ms X to recognise the impact of the fault, and review other decisions about summer born children to ensure they were made correctly.

  • Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (19 019 229)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 28-Sep-2020

    Summary: Ms X complains about the school admission appeal panel’s decision to refuse her appeal for a school place for her daughter. Ms X says this meant her daughter was not considered properly for the available place and missed out. The Ombudsman does not find the Council at fault.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings