School admissions

Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Wolverhampton City Council (20 007 392)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 18-Feb-2021

    Summary: Mrs B complains that the independent school admissions appeal panel did not properly consider her appeal for a place for her son, C, at the school his brother attends. The Council has now offered a Mrs B a fresh appeal with a new panel. The Ombudsman proposes to discontinue our investigation because we do not consider that investigating further would lead to a better outcome.

  • St. Georges Primary School (20 005 524)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 10-Feb-2021

    Summary: The Ombudsman found fault by the school in the way it dealt with Mrs M's request for an in-year place for her daughter. It failed to explain the process, offer her an application form, explain her appeal rights, and delayed forwarding her appeal form. The evidence failed to show the appeal panel properly considered the appeal or followed the correct procedure. The agreed action remedies the injustice these failures caused.

  • Leeds City Council (20 003 940)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 05-Feb-2021

    Summary: there was no fault in the way an Independent Appeal Panel made its decision not to admit Ms M's daughter to a secondary school. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions made without fault.

  • Our Lady's Bishop Eton Catholic Primary School (20 002 694)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 21-Jan-2021

    Summary: Miss X complained about how the School considered her child's admissions application and appeal and managed its waiting list. The School and admissions appeal panel were not at fault.

  • Derby City Council (20 005 436)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 14-Jan-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complains that a school admissions appeal hearing for her daughter was not properly conducted. There is insufficient evidence to show Mrs X's arguments were balanced against prejudice to the school if her daughter were admitted. This is fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mrs X and her daughter. The Council has agreed to hold a further appeal hearing to remedy this.

  • Gloucestershire County Council (20 006 700)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 13-Jan-2021

    Summary: The Ombudsman has found procedural fault in the way the school admissions panel considered Mrs B's admissions appeal. This caused Mrs B an injustice and so we have recommended the Council hold a new appeal.

  • Lancashire County Council (20 003 703)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 05-Jan-2021

    Summary: Mr B complained that the Council had failed to explain why his address did not fall within the geographical priority area of their preferred secondary school for their daughter. We find that the parents should have raised this matter at the appeal. We do not find any fault in the appeal process and the Council has clarified the information available for checking the geographical priority area.

  • St Philip's Catholic Primary School, Stockport (20 003 872)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 16-Dec-2020

    Summary: There was fault in the way an appeal panel considered an application for a school place in that it incorrectly applied law relating to infant class sizes to an application for a place in year 5. This casts doubt on the decision the panel reached. Mr X has now been offered a fresh appeal to remedy the injustice caused. Recommendations for an apology and service improvements are also made.

  • Leeds City Council (20 002 640)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 04-Dec-2020

    Summary: Mrs M complains about an Independent Appeal Panel's decision not to admit her son to a primary school. There is no fault in the Panel's decision. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions taken without fault.

  • Leeds City Council (20 002 856)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 23-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mrs M complains about an Independent Appeal Panel's decision not to admit her daughter to a primary school. There is no fault in the Panel's decision. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions taken without fault.

Privacy settings

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.