Summary: the Council did not help Ms M to find a new school for her son, B, quickly enough, but the payment the Council has offered for the education B missed is a suitable remedy.

The complaint

1. Ms M complains about the lack of support from the Council to find a school place for her son, B, and the education he missed as a result. She is unhappy with the Council’s response to her complaint. She wants the Council to reimburse £5,000 she spent on independent school fees for the summer term in 2021.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered:
• information provided by Ms M; and
• information provided by the Council.
5. I invited Ms M and the Council to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

6. Ms M needed to find a school place for her son, B, unexpectedly and at short notice in the summer of 2020. B had been a pupil at an independent school. During the early months of the pandemic, Ms M lost her livelihood and her home. She went to stay with her mother as a temporary measure and began to look for a new school for B.
7. Ms M applied for places at three schools. She applied directly to School A in July 2020. The school said she should apply through the Council. Ms M applied using the Council’s online portal on 20 October 2020. Ms M applied for a place at a second school, School B through the portal on 26 October 2020. Ms M applied for a place at a third school, School C on 1 March 2021 once she had secured her own accommodation.
8. Having failed to secure a school place, Ms M enrolled B at an independent school for the summer term in 2021.
9. On 9 June, School C offered B a place and agreed to hold the offer until September.
10. Ms M complained to the Council. She complained about the lack of support finding a school place for B and the education he missed as a result. She said she had sold her car to pay school fees when it looked as though B would miss the whole school year. She asked the Council to reimburse the school fees and associated costs, which came to £5,000.
11. The Council accepted there had been delay referring B’s case to the Inclusion Service between November 2020 and April 2021. The Inclusion Service works with children missing from education. The Council apologised and offered a payment of £1,300. The Council said it based the payment on guidance published by the Ombudsman: £200 per month for the education B missed, and £300 for Ms M’s time and trouble.
12. Unhappy with the Council’s response, Ms M complained to the Ombudsman.

Consideration

13. The Council has acknowledged it made mistakes and offered a remedy for the injustice caused. I welcome the Council’s response. The question for the Ombudsman is whether the remedy is sufficient.
14. Responsibility for securing a suitable education rests primarily with the parent.
15. Councils must ensure there are sufficient school places available, and they have a duty to identify children not receiving a suitable education. However, it is a parent’s responsibility to ensure their child receives a suitable education.
16. Councils have powers to help when parents are unable to enrol their children in a suitable school. They must provide advice, including telling parents where there are school places available. They may direct some schools to admit pupils, and in some circumstances they may arrange alternative tuition.
17. In B’s case, the Council accepts it should have helped sooner. The Council says there was a delay referring B’s case to the Inclusion Service. The Inclusion Service is intended to help children in B’s circumstances. The Council says it should have referred B to the Inclusion Service six months sooner. It has offered a payment to acknowledge six months’ loss of education. It has based the payment at the lowest end of the scale used by the Ombudsman. It has also made improvements to the service to avoid similar problems in the future.
18. The question for the Ombudsman, then, is whether this response is appropriate. I consider it is. Responsibility for the education B missed is shared between Ms M and the Council, and the Council’s remedy recognises this. I set out my reasons below.
19. Ms M and B faced difficult and distressing circumstances in summer 2020 with the loss of Ms M’s livelihood and their home. It will no doubt have been a distressing time for B who also had to change schools.
20. It was, however, Ms M’s responsibility to secure a suitable school place for B.
21. The Council’s website at the time gave clear information for parents needing to apply for school places because they had to move house. The website said parents should apply for places through the Council’s online portal.
22. The Council told Ms M she should apply directly to School A, which contradicts information on its website and the advice of the school. This no doubt caused confusion and delay. The Council processed Ms M’s application for Schools B and C.
23. The Council’s website said it aimed to process applications within 20 school days. Ms M’s applications took longer. However, when her applications were unsuccessful, Ms M did not use her right of appeal. Ms M says she believed an appeal would be a waste of time. I do not agree. An appeal is an opportunity for a parent to try to persuade an independent panel to admit their child to a school of their choice that is full.
24. The Council says it told Ms M there were places available at School D. The school is approximately three miles from where Ms M was staying at the time. Ms M says this advice was inappropriate and the school was not an option as she was looking for accommodation elsewhere. I do not agree. While I appreciate the problems involved in finding suitable accommodation, and Ms M’s understandable wish that B should not move schools more than necessary, I am satisfied the Council offered appropriate advice to ensure B could receive suitable education.
25. I note Ms M only applied for two school places during the time she stayed with her mother, and each school was more then 12 miles away. Ms M did not apply to any of the five local schools. While parents have a right to express a preference for the school their child will attend, they do not have an absolute right to choose. It appears there were other schools to which Ms M could have applied while she lived with her mother which she did not explore.
26. Ms M did not then apply for another school, School C, until 1 March 2021 after she had secured her own accommodation in February 2021. The Council wrote on 11 April to say her application had been unsuccessful as the school was full. Ms M disputes this and says she was later told a place had been available. However, Ms M did not use her right of appeal. This would have been her opportunity to challenge the decision. I will not investigate the matter now as there is nothing I can achieve.
27. The Council’s Admissions Service made a referral to the Inclusion Service on 7 April 2021. I note it was almost seven weeks before the Inclusion Service contacted Ms M on 24 May. Two weeks later, School C offered B a place. The school agreed to hold the place until the beginning of the following term.
28. The Council accepts there was delay involving the Inclusion Service and believes a referral should have been made six months earlier. It has offered a remedy for the education B missed during the six months of delay. It offered a payment at the lowest end of the scale used by the Ombudsman. I consider this an appropriate remedy. It acknowledges the fact the Council was at fault and should have done more and the impact this had, but it takes account of the fact it was primarily Ms M’s responsibility to secure a school place for B.
29. In her response to the Council’s offer, Ms M described the Council’s reasoning as “victim blaming”. I do not agree. I do not doubt that Ms M was the victim of hardship as a result of the pandemic and faced difficult and undesirable choices. Nevertheless, it remained her responsibility to secure suitable education for B. The Council should have helped sooner, and has accepted it made mistakes, but there was more Ms M could have done. Ms M is a victim of the pandemic, but the pandemic is not the reason B missed education. The Council is not blaming Ms M for being a victim of the pandemic.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council which had an impact on Ms M and B, but the Council has offered a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman