Summary: The Ombudsman should not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to share information about his child or involve him in a school application. It is unlikely we would find any fault which requires a remedy and the Information Commissioner is better placed.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, says the Council failed to provide him with information about his child, B, and failed to involve him in B’s school place application.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word 'fault' to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:
• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify the cost of our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, o
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information Mr X provided with his complaint and the Council’s responses to Mr X, which it provided. Mr X had an opportunity to comment on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X has a child, B, who lives with their mother. In advance of B starting senior school in September 2019, Mr X asked the Council in late February 2019 to provide all the information it had on B’s school application. The Council did so in early March 2019.
5. Mr X says the Council delayed in providing the information he says he is entitled to. He says the Council asked B’s mother’s permission first and did not need to do so. He says he has not been properly and fully involved in B’s school application.
6. The Council apologised for any delay. It says it provided all the information it can. It also provided a detailed explanation of why it sought the mother’s views.

Analysis

7. There is little more that can be gained by our investigation. Mr X had all the information within a short period of time. If he believes there is more information which has not been provided, he can make a ‘subject access request’ under the Data Protection Act rules and apply to the Information Commissioner’s Office for a decision on this issue. It is reasonable to expect him to do so as Parliament set up this process for this issue.
8. The Council has no duty to fully involve all parents in school applications. It is the parents’ duty to apply for a place. It is not fault for the Council not to have contacted all separated parents on all applications.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault which needs any remedy and the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to decide if all the information has been disclosed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman