School exclusions


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Derbyshire County Council (17 007 016)

    Statement Not upheld School exclusions 12-Feb-2018

    Summary: There is no fault in the way an independent review panel, arranged by the Council, reached its decision to uphold the permanent exclusion of Mr F's son.

  • London Borough of Lewisham (16 011 888)

    Statement Not upheld School exclusions 19-Jul-2017

    Summary: There is no fault in the way an independent review panel, arranged by the Council, considered Ms X's son's permanent exclusion from school. The Council arranged education for him at its pupil referral unit which has considered his reintegration to mainstream school and will continue to review this regularly.

  • Essex County Council (15 017 953)

    Statement Upheld School exclusions 28-Apr-2016

    Summary: The Council delayed for two weeks in finding alternative schooling for a child who had been permanently excluded from school. The Ombudsman will close the complaint as the Council has agreed to offer Ms B £200 to spend on activities to support her son's learning. It will also review how it finds alternative education provision where there is an ongoing discussion about alternatives to exclusion.

  • Wolverhampton City Council (13 005 239)

    Statement Upheld School exclusions 19-Oct-2015

    Summary: The Council was at fault in condoning the unlawful exclusion from school of a child with a statement of special educational needs and in not making alternative educational provision in a timely way.

  • Hertfordshire County Council (14 020 354)

    Statement Not upheld School exclusions 02-Sep-2015

    Summary: Mrs N complained about the decision to exclude her son, R, from his primary school. The Ombudsman has not found evidence of fault in the conduct of the review panel that would call into question the decision.

  • London Borough of Ealing (14 017 201)

    Statement Not upheld School exclusions 07-Jul-2015

    Summary: Ms X complained that an independent appeal panel did not properly consider the permanent exclusion of her son from his primary school. There is no fault in the appeal panel's consideration.

  • Bedford Borough Council (14 019 934)

    Statement Not upheld School exclusions 26-Jun-2015

    Summary: There was no fault in how the Independent Review Panel considered Ms X's request for a review of School 1's decision to permanently exclude her son.

  • Wolverhampton City Council (14 019 203)

    Statement Not upheld School exclusions 23-Apr-2015

    Summary: The Council has agreed to conduct a Stage 2 investigation into Mrs B's complaint about her son's exclusion from school and subsequent lack of education. I have closed this complaint to allow this to take place.

  • South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (14 004 933)

    Statement Not upheld School exclusions 22-Oct-2014

    Summary: The Council met its duty to offer full-time education for Mrs X's son, N, after he was permanently excluded from school. It therefore acted without fault. Mrs X's complaint about the actions of N's school is outside the Ombudsman's jurisdiction and I have no authority to consider it.

  • Blackburn with Darwen Council (14 000 212)

    Statement Not upheld School exclusions 29-Sep-2014

    Summary: There was no fault in how the Independent Review Panel considered the governing body's decision not to reinstate the complainant's permanently excluded son.

;