Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a school place application and appeal. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation and any investigation could not achieve what the complainant would like. The complainant has appealed against the refusal of a preferred place and can apply for an alternative school if they consider the allocated one unsuitable.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of her application for a school place for her child. She says the Council has not properly considered her school admissions appeal properly and the school place her child has been given is unsuitable.
2. Miss X also complains about how the Council has handled her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes limits on what we can investigate.
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. We may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right, but we cannot do so if they have already appealed or applied to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
5. 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 not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Miss X applied for a school place for her child to start secondary school in September 2025 but only expressed a single preference rather than three. She gave no details of any other circumstances she wanted the Council to consider as part of the school admissions process. The Council offered a school place for Miss X’s child at an available school as the one she preferred was oversubscribed.
9. Miss X appealed against the decision to refuse a place at her preferred school. In June 2025, an independent appeal panel considered evidence from Miss X and the school, but the appeal was unsuccessful. Miss X says she felt disadvantaged as the panel and school representative met in person and she was attending remotely using an online video link.
10. The evidence shows the panel considered the grounds of appeal from both the school and Miss X. This included Miss X’s concerns about the journey to school, the child’s medical needs and specific safeguarding concerns. The clerk’s notes are comprehensive and the letter notifying Miss X of the outcome detailed why the appeal was unsuccessful. There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate Miss X was disadvantaged by not attending the appeal in person. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or the appeal panel to justify an investigation.
11. Miss X says the school offered is unsuitable, but the Council disagrees. It is not for the Ombudsman to adjudicate between opposing views, nor can we direct the Council to make alternative provision.
12. Miss X did not accept the school place offered to her, and her child has not attended the secondary school. She says the Council has not provided a suitable school place. Miss X has the right to apply for a place at another local school. The Council told her of this option, and it is reasonable to expect her to use it.
13. Miss X complains the Council has not properly planned for the number of children that required a school place. The Council says every child was offered a place to start secondary school in September 2025. There is not enough evidence the Council has provided too few places overall, so there is no fault for the Ombudsman to investigate.
14. Miss X says the Council has wrongly recorded her child as being electively home educated. She says she did not elect to educate her child at home, but from the evidence I have seen Miss X did not send her child to the allocated school nor apply for an alternative school instead. However, Miss X’s complaint and the Council’s response go back to early September 2025 so if Miss X is unhappy about events since then she should complain about them to the Council and give it chance to reply.
15. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of her complaint. We do not investigate how a Council has handled a complaint if we are not investigating the subject of the complaint, as here.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence the Council is at fault to justify an investigation, nor could we achieve the results Miss X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman