Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a delay in providing a place at a school. The injustice to Mr X and his family is not significant enough to justify our investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council mismanaged his school application.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X which included the Council’s reply.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says in January 2026 he applied for a place at School Y for his child, Z. He says School Y refused a place even though the school year Z needed was not full. Mr X complained to the Council. It says a ‘fair access’ committee considered the application and the Council instructed School Y to accept Z. Mr X says Z started at School Y in April 2026. He says Z remained at their previous school until the move.
6. Mr X says the whole process has been very stressful and he feels the Council has shown an attitude of not caring.
7. Z has missed no education. The time to sort the place out is relatively short. The impact on Mr X and his family is not serious enough for us to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the injustice is not significant enough to justify an investigation

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman