Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her child not receiving an education. It is unlikely we would find Council fault has caused this.

The complaint

1. Mrs X says the Council has failed to provide her child, Y, with a suitable education for one academic year.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X applied for a year seven place at three schools ( later adding a fourth) to start in September 2025 for her eldest child Y. She has two younger children who attend two different schools. She was unsuccessful. Other applicants had a higher priority under the admissions criteria. The Council allocated Y a place at the nearest school with places, School Z. It is less than 1.5 miles from their home. This is under half the distance the law says it is reasonable to expect a child over 8 years old to walk to school.
6. Mrs X refused the allocation. She appealed the four schools she preferred. She was unsuccessful. She says Y remained out of school for the whole academic year 2025/26.
7. Mrs X complained to the Council in July 2026. She said the Council had failed to provide Y with a suitable education under s19 of the Education Act and that it should refer her case to the Council’s Fair Access Protocol (FAP) panel.
8. The Council says Y does not qualify under s19. Nor do they qualify for the FAP because there are now three schools with places less than three miles from their home. Mrs X says these schools are not suitable for Y as Mrs X could not get Y to those schools and the other two children to their schools.

Analysis

9. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that a council must arrange suitable alternative educational provision when it finds that a child is unable to attend school because of a permanent exclusion, an illness, or for any other reason which make the school inaccessible to the child. The alternative educational provision must be suitable to the child’s age, ability and aptitude, and any special education.
10. There are school places available at schools within the legal walking distance Y can be expected to walk. Parental problems with carrying out school runs is not usually a reason the school is classified as ‘inaccessible’ under s19. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision s19 does not apply.
11. FAPs are used for children who are out of school and hard to place. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision the case does not qualify for the FAP as there are places available at local schools for Y.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman