Summary: A parent complained that the school admission appeal panel did not take proper account of the evidence he provided about his son’s special needs when it refused his appeal for a place at his preferred primary school. But the Ombudsman will not start an investigation of this matter because the parent no longer wishes to pursue the issue in his complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr B, complained the school admission appeal panel had unreasonably turned down his appeal about the refusal of a place for his son (‘C’) at his preferred primary school (‘School X’). Mr B complained in particular that the panel had not taken proper account of the information he provided about C’s special needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can decide whether to start an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. We will not start an investigation where someone decides they do not want to continue with their complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information Mr B provided with his complaint, and his comments when we spoke on the telephone. I also considered Mr B’s comments in response to a draft of my decision. In addition I took account of information the Council provided in response to my enquiries in Mr B’s case.

Back to top

What I found

4. C started school in the Reception year this September.
5. When Mr B applied for a school place for C he put School X down as his first preference.
6. But the Council refused Mr B’s application for School X because all the places were filled by children with a higher priority that C under the admission arrangements. The Council instead offered C a place at another local school (‘School Y’).
7. Mr B appealed about the refusal of a place at School X. But the independent admission appeal panel turned down his appeal.
8. Mr B then complained to the Ombudsman about the panel. He was particularly concerned that the panel had not listened properly to what he said at the appeal about C’s special needs, and had not seen or not taken sufficient account of all the supporting documents he had provided.
9. In response to my enquiries about Mr B’s complaint the Council said it had not received all of the documents Mr B said he had sent before the appeal hearing. The Council also noted that it only received one page of medical letter Mr B had provided. In the circumstances the Council said it would arrange a fresh appeal hearing with a different panel if Mr B could now provide full copies of all of his supporting information.
10. But in response to the Council’s offer Mr B said he had reconsidered matters and had now decided it would be better for his son to stay at School Y. Therefore he did not want to take up the Council’s offer of a new appeal for School X.
11. On this basis we are treating Mr B’s complaint as having been withdrawn and, therefore, we will not pursue matters any further in his case.

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman has no reason to start an investigation of Mr B’s complaint about the way the school admission appeal panel dealt with his appeal for a school place for his son. This is because Mr B no longer wishes to pursue a place at the school in question and, as a result, we are treating his complaint as having been withdrawn.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman