Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about the independent appeal panel’s decision not to admit her son to the school because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Ms M complained following her unsuccessful appeal for a place for her son, B, at the school. She believes her own recent ill-health, and that of B’s father, justify admitting B to the school, although she did not mention it in her appeal.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. We do not decide whether Ms M’s son should be admitted to the school. We are not another appeal. Our job is to consider the work of the independent appeal panel. Ms M says she did not tell the panel about her ill-health or that of B’s father. The panel can only consider information provided during the appeal.
6. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating Ms M’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman