Summary: The School was at fault for failing to properly consider Mrs X’s request for admission outside of chronological age group for her two summer born children in line with the relevant law and guidance. This caused Mrs X distress, frustration and uncertainty about her children’s education. The School has agreed to apologise and review its decision.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the School failed to properly consider Mrs X’s request for admission outside of chronological age group for her summer born children in line with the relevant law and guidance. This caused Mrs X distress, frustration and uncertainty about her children’s education.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

6. ‘Summer born children’ are children born between 1 April and 31 August. These children are not required to start school until the September following their fifth birthday.
7. Parents can request their summer born children are admitted to a reception class in the September following their fifth birthday rather than year one. This means they are educated outside their normal age group.
8. Parents decide when their children start school. The admission authority decides whether they start in reception or year one.
9. The Government has issued guidance (The school admissions code 2021) for admission authorities deciding which year group a child should be admitted to.
10. The school admissions code 2021 says the admission authority must:

• make decisions in the best interests of the child; and
• take account of the child’s individual needs and abilities and consider whether these can best be met in reception or year one; and
• take account of the potential impact on the child of being admitted to year one without first having completed the reception year.

11. The guidance says, “In effect, this means that the authority is making a decision about whether it would be in the child’s best interest to miss the reception year.”
12. The guidance says it is reasonable to expect parents to provide information to support their request, but they are not expected to obtain professional evidence they do not already have.
13. Factors an admission authority will need to consider include:
• parents’ views
• information about a child’s academic, social, and emotional development
• where relevant, a child’s medical history and the views of a medical professional
• whether a child would naturally have fallen into a lower age group if they had not been born prematurely
• the potential impact on a child of being admitted to their normal age group and missing a year of their education as a consequence.
14. Admission authorities must set out clearly the process for requesting admission outside the normal year group, including what information and evidence parents should provide and when. There is no prescribed process admission authorities must follow, although the guidance notes some authorities use decision making panels to consider requests, and some invite parents to attend panel meetings.
15. The admission authority must, however, give reasons for its decision.
16. The Department for Education guidance on handling admission requests for summer-born children says, the government believes it is rarely in a child’s best interests to miss a year of their education, for example, by beginning primary school in year 1 rather than reception, or secondary school in year 8 rather than year 7.

What happened

17. Mrs X has two summer born children. In January 2025, she contacted the School and said she was delaying sending them to school until September 2026. At this point, they will be at compulsory school age.
18. Mrs X wanted her children to start in a reception class in September 2026 rather than year one with their chronological age group. She provided documentation and research to support this.
19. An admissions panel met in February 2025 to decide whether to accept Mrs X’s request. The panel said it did not approve deferment. It encouraged Mrs X to start the children in September 2025 but if not, the school would offer admission into year one in September 2026. The panel gave the following reasons:
• Mrs X had provided supporting pieces of research but this was outdated and none specifically outlined the potential negative effects on the children involved;
• The School had children in attendance with similar circumstances to Mrs X’s children. They had started in their chronological age group and were making good progress;
• The curriculum is structured to cater to the needs of all pupils. Allowing the children to access this with their chronological age group, would allow the School to support them appropriately throughout their time there.
• The children did not have special educational needs so there was no need for deferment;
• If they were to admit the children into a reception class in September 2026, at the point they transition to another school, it may only accept them into their chronological year group; and
• Overall, the School felt it could best support the social and academic progress of both children within their chronological age group.
20. After receiving the decision, Mrs X asked the School to reconsider its decision. Mrs X said the School had not considered whether it was in the best interest for the children to start in reception or year one in September 2026. Instead, the School encouraged Mrs X to enrol the children in reception with their chronological age group.
21. The following month, the School sent a letter to Mrs X saying it acknowledges and supports her right to start her children a year later, in this case September 2026. However, it believes it is in their best interest to admit them in reception 2025 with their chronological peers. The School decided if Mrs X did not admit them in reception 2025, the children would start in year one in September 2026.
22. There was no right of appeal for this decision as it offered a school place but not in Mrs X’s preferred age group.
23. Mrs X remained dissatisfied with the matter and complained to us.

My findings

24. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. It is not for us to decide in which school year the children should start. Our role is to consider the processes followed by the School in reaching its decision. If we find it followed the processes correctly, we cannot question the decision.
25. When Mrs X decided that her children would not be starting school until September 2026 when they were at compulsory school age, the School should have considered whether it was in the children’s best interest to start in reception or year one in 2026. The School failed to do this as the evidence shows it only considered whether it was in the best interest of the children to start in reception in 2025. The School has also said if they do not start in reception in 2025, they will be admitted into year one in 2026. However, the School has not explained why it is in their best interests to start in year one or the potential impacts of missing a school year.
26. The School failed to properly consider Mrs X’s request for admission outside of chronological age group which was fault. This has caused Mrs X distress, frustration and uncertainty about her children’s education.

Back to top

Action

27. Within one month of the final decision, the School has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Mrs X for the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by the School’s failure to properly consider her request.
2. Carry out a review of its decision in line with the relevant law and guidance. It should consider Mrs X’s request and consider whether it is in the children’s best interest to start in reception or year one in September 2026 taking into account the bullet points set out in paragraph 10 and 13.
3. Review its admissions policy to ensure that in the future, requests for admission outside of chronological age group are considered in line with the relevant law and guidance.
28. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The School should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
29. The School should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

30. I find fault causing injustice. The School has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman