Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s administration of its school admission procedure. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss B, complains that the Council has been at fault in the management of its school admission procedure, thereby denying her daughter a place at the school of her choice.

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 effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss B applied for a school place for her daughter for secondary transfer in 2022. The application was unsuccessful, and her daughter’s name was placed on the school’s waiting list.
6. Mis B complains about two aspects of the Council’s school admission process. First, she complains that people who did not originally express a preference have been added to the school’s waiting list ahead of her daughter. She regards this as an abuse of the system and wants the Council to prevent applicants from changing their preferences.
7. The Ombudsman cannot pursue this matter. As the Council has correctly explained, the statutory guidance says waiting lists must be ranked according to the admission criteria and that no account must be taken of the date the preference was expressed. Taking the action Miss B has asked for would clearly breach the statutory guidance and is likely to be unlawful. The Council is not at fault in allowing applicants to change their preferences.
8. Second, Miss B complains that the Council has failed to take action to prevent fraudulent applications. Specifically, she claims that the Council has not implemented the address checks it claims to have carried out.
9. While Miss B may understand this to be the case, she has not been party to the administration of other people’s applications. These are confidential between the Council and the applicant. If she has evidence of fraudulent activity in specific cases, she may report it to the Council. There is no role for the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman