School admissions


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (25 018 519)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 16-Feb-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an unsuccessful school admission appeal. Mr X’s child has now been offered a place at his preferred school. Investigation by the Ombudsman could not achieve anything more.

  • Hampshire County Council (25 019 039)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 16-Feb-2026

    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.

  • Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council (25 020 183)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 16-Feb-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an unsuccessful school admission appeal. Mr X’s child has now been offered a place at his preferred school. Investigation by the Ombudsman could not achieve anything more.

  • Liverpool City Council (25 011 492)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 14-Feb-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her application for a school place. Any issues Miss X wants to raise about the way the Council dealt with her application are best considered under the appeals process. The Council offered an alternative place as it was required to do and there is not enough evidence of fault in its decision not to place Miss X’s child using its Fair Access Protocol.

  • Durham County Council (25 007 651)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 13-Feb-2026

    Summary: Mrs X complained how the independent appeal panel dealt with her appeal for a school place for her son. We find some fault in the clerk’s notes about the stage one process. This did not cause Mrs X a significant injustice. However, the Council has agreed to our recommendation to implement a service improvement to prevent a recurrence of the fault.

  • Kingsland C Of E Primary School (25 005 520)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 09-Feb-2026

    Summary: Mrs B complained that the School considered the wrong test in deciding to refuse her application for delayed entry for her daughter, C to start school in reception in September 2026. Based on current evidence we have found fault and have asked the School to reconsider the application using the correct test.

  • Milton Keynes Council (25 011 975)

    Statement Upheld School admissions 04-Feb-2026

    Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to properly consider Mrs X’s request for a school admission outside of chronological age group for her two summer born children in line with the relevant law and guidance. This caused Mrs X distress, frustration and uncertainty about her children’s education. The Council has agreed to apologise and review its decision.

  • 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.

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