Summary: Mr G complained about the school admissions appeal hearing for his child, who we will call H. During our investigation, H received an offer of a place at Whitley Bay High School. We have discontinued our investigation because there is no worthwhile outcome to be achieved by further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr G complained that Whitley Bay High School (‘WBHS’) failed to properly consider the arguments he presented during a school admissions appeal hearing against the decision to refuse a place for his child, H. In particular, he says the panel did not properly consider the reasons why he applied for H’s school place after the national closing date for on-time applications.
2. Mr G says that fault in the process meant that H did not receive a place at WBHS.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by Mr G and WBHS as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mr G and WBHS had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr G complained to the Ombudsman about the process followed by the independent panel and Clerk during a school appeal hearing for his child, H.
8. At the time of the matters complained about, H was in Year 8 at a Middle School and due to transfer to High School in September 2025 as part of the normal transfer process in Mr G’s area.
9. Following a decision made in December 2024 to close a local High School, the local authority (‘the Council’) introduced an “extraordinary” admissions round to ensure affected children were not disadvantaged. The Council extended the closing date for applications, but only for those who met certain criteria.
10. Mr G applied after the national deadline of 31 October 2024, but before the extended deadline of 17 January 2025. H did not receive an offer for WBHS because the Council classed the application as late.
11. Mr G appealed the refusal and put forward reasons why he thought H should have received a place at WBHS. After the panel refused his appeal, Mr G complained to the LGSCO about procedural fault and unfairness in the process.
12. During our investigation, Mr G told us that H received an offer of a place at WBHS.
13. If we find procedural fault in a school admissions appeal, which in turn causes uncertainty about the soundness of the panel’s decision, we may recommend a second appeal. This is in line with the LGSCO’s published Remedies Guidance.
14. In Mr G’s case, H has already received an offer for WBHS and so there is no worthwhile outcome for us to achieve by further investigation. We have therefore discontinued our investigation.

Back to top

Decision

15. We have discontinued the investigation into Mr G’s complaint about the school admissions appeal for H as there is no worthwhile outcome for the Ombudsman to achieve.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman