Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the information provided by the Council about the school admissions process. This is because Ms X has not suffered significant injustice and it is unlikely an investigation could add to the Council’s response.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains that the Council did not provide clear and consistent guidance about the school application process. She says that during phone calls to the Council she was advised to apply directly to her preferred school. As a result, she did not complete the Council’s application, her child was therefore not included in the main school allocation process and was not offered a place at her preferred school.
2. Ms X says this has affected family life, stability and her child’s sense of security and wellbeing.
3. Ms X would like the Council to offer her child a place in her preferred school. She would also like the Council to review how it communicates admissions guidance. She says there should be proper recording of telephone advice given, so parents are not disadvantaged by lack of evidence.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

5. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

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. Ms X says she relied on advice given by the Council and by her preferred school. She says she phoned the Council to ask how to apply to her preferred school and was told she needed to apply directly to the school.
9. Ms X was sent information from the Council and her child’s primary school informing her about secondary transfer applications. The Council wrote to Ms X multiple times as the deadline and late deadline for applications approached, to remind her to complete the Council’s application form.
10. The preferred school’s application form clearly states that the Council’s application must be completed and deadline adhered to.
11. Ms X says she was told over the phone she needed to apply directly to the school, and she therefore believed she had completed the application process. The Council’s records do not show any phone calls from Ms X until after the date when secondary school places were allocated. If the Council gave incorrect advice at this stage, I do not consider Ms X suffered any significant injustice as it could not have affected her child’s school allocation.

It is unfortunate that Ms X’s child has not been allocated a place in her preferred school. However, I consider the Council has taken steps to give her the information she needed to complete the process accurately. I consider it unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman would add to the Council’s response.

12. Final decision

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman