Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the school admissions process for Mr X’s son. This is because while the Council was at fault, it is unlikely we could add anything to its response. We cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complained about the school admissions process for his son. Mr X said the Council told him his son (Y) had been assessed as suitable for a grammar school place. Because of this, Mr X moved his family closer to his preferred schools. The Council then said it had wrongly advised Mr X and Y was not considered suitable for a grammar school. Mr X says this means he moved unnecessarily and wants the Council to offer a place at his preferred school (School Z).

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as academies (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34A, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

7. Mr X’s son was due to start secondary school in September 2023. Y sat the Kent Test which is used to decide if children are suitable for a grammar (selective) or high school (non-selective) place. Performance in the test does not guarantee a place in a particular school.
8. Y scored 335 in the test. To be considered suitable for a grammar school a child needs to score at least 332 with no individual score below 109. Y scored 105 in the English part of the test.
9. Mr X contacted the Council about Y’s score and what it meant. As the Council explained in its responses to Mr X’s complaints, the following happened:
• 18 October: A member of the Council’s staff told Mr X his son had been assessed as suitable for a high school place.
• 20 October: The Council told Mr X a headteacher panel had assessed Y as suitable for a grammar school place.
• 21 October: School Z confirmed Y had been assessed as suitable for a high school place.
• 23 October: The Council again confirmed Y had been assessed as suitable for a grammar school place. This was because the member of staff relied on the previous advice given.
• 26 October: The Council said Y had been assessed as suitable for a high school place.
• 15 November: School Z again confirmed Y had been assessed as suitable for a high school place.
10. Mr X took on a lease on a new property on 21 November and vacated his previous property on 05 December 2022. Mr X told the Council on 07 and 08 December he had moved. The Council confirmed some of the advice it had given Mr X was wrong.
11. Mr X had applied for places at his preferred schools. Because Y was not considered suitable for a grammar school place, all his applications for places at grammar schools were refused. This included his first preference (School Z) which is an academy.
12. As a result of Mr X’s complaints, the Council apologised. It noted Mr X had received three pieces of information which said Y had not been assessed as suitable for a grammar school. Mr X had also received two pieces of conflicting advice. Mr X unfortunately acted on the wrong advice.
13. The Council explained why it could not change Y’s assessment or give Mr X the outcome he wanted. The Council explained around 800 other children achieved a similar or higher score and were not offered a grammar school place. It would therefore be unfair to deem Y to be of grammar school ability.
14. The Council also explained that it could not offer a place at Mr X’s preferred school because it is not the admission authority. It is also not the admission authority for any of his other preferred schools. The Council explained Mr X’s only option was to appeal. It wrote a letter to the panels which heard each of Mr X’s appeals explaining what had happened. The Council said it would raise Mr X’s case as part of staff training.
15. Mr X has appealed unsuccessfully for places at his preferred schools.

Assessment

16. The Council clearly acted with fault by giving Mr X wrong advice on more than one occasion. This is clearly not acceptable.
17. But in deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include what we could achieve by investigating.
18. The Council has accepted it acted with fault, apologised, explained what happened, and wrote to the panels which considered Mr X’s appeals. It has explained why it cannot give Mr X the outcome he wants.
19. So, while I understand Mr X’s frustrations, we will not investigate his complaint. This is because if we were to investigate, it is difficult to see what more we could achieve. We could not say Mr X’s child should be offered a place at any of his preferred schools for the same reasons put forward by the Council. We also have no powers to consider complaints involving academy schools. It is also unlikely we would offer any financial remedy as the decision to move was Mr X’s – despite the inconsistent advice he received. An investigation by the Ombudsman is not therefore appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

20. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. There was fault by the Council, but it is unlikely we could add anything to the Council’s response. Also, we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman