School admissions


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • East Sussex County Council (25 021 705)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 30-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his application for a school place. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant us investigating.

  • JCOSS (25 006 818)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 27-Jan-2026

    Summary: Mrs X complained the appeal panel failed to properly consider her appeal. The notes from the appeal hearing and the decision letter following the appeal do not properly explain why the appeal panel reached its decisions on the various parts of the appeal. Holding a further appeal is satisfactory remedy.

  • St Bede's School, Redhill (25 003 949)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 22-Jan-2026

    Summary: Mr X complained the appeal panel failed to properly consider his appeal. The notes from the appeal hearing and the decision letter following the appeal do not properly explain why the appeal panel reached its decisions on the appeal. Holding a further appeal and providing refresher training to appeal panel members and clerks is satisfactory remedy.

  • Pittville School (25 006 088)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 21-Jan-2026

    Summary: Mrs X complained about an unsuccessful appeal for her child to attend Pittville School. We find procedural fault because the clerk’s notes of the appeal hearing do not comply with the School Admission Appeals Code. They do not show how the appeal panel reached its decision, how it assessed and balanced the competing arguments, or how the panel voted. This creates uncertainty about whether the appeal was properly decided. The School has agreed to remind panels and clerks of their duty to properly record decision-making in line with the Code. We would normally also recommend that the School arrange a fresh appeal hearing with a different panel, however Mrs X has confirmed she no longer wishes to pursue a change of school.

  • London Borough of Ealing (25 023 222)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 20-Jan-2026

    Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about an unsuccessful school admission appeal. This is because the law prevents us from investigating complaints about admission to free schools or academies.

  • Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (25 005 388)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 05-Jan-2026

    Summary: Ms X complained how the independent appeal panel dealt with her appeal for a place for her daughter at her preferred secondary school. We find some fault in how the panel handled Ms X’s appeal. This means she cannot be satisfied the process was carried out fairly. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and carry out a new appeal.

  • City of Wolverhampton Council (25 003 181)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 02-Jan-2026

    Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council considered a school admissions appeal for Y. We find no fault with the process the Council followed to consider Miss X’s appeal.

  • Staffordshire County Council (25 008 633)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 17-Dec-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to be able to question its decision.

  • Maidstone Grammar School For Girls (25 013 980)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 16-Dec-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful school admission appeal. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault for us to question the panel’s decision.

  • Kent County Council (25 002 402)

    Statement Not upheld School admissions 12-Dec-2025

    Summary: There was no fault in how the Council considered a request for reasonable adjustments for Mr X’s child when they sat the grammar test exam. There was also no fault in how the independent appeal panel considered Mr X’s appeal of the decision not to award his child a school place.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings