Summary: Mrs Y complains about the conduct of the Council’s presenting officer before a school admission appeal hearing. She complains the Council failed to respond to her complaint. We have upheld Mrs Y’s complaint that the Council has failed to respond to her complaint. This caused Mrs Y uncertainty. To remedy this, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs Y, make her a payment and put her complaint through its complaints process.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall refer to here as Mrs Y, complains about the conduct of a Council officer prior to her school admission appeal hearing for her son, B. In particular, Mrs Y complains the Council officer acted inappropriately by referring to her appeal in a meeting with the Chair of Governors of her son’s primary school, contacting B’s head teacher to discuss the appeal and by conducting a social media search in her case.
2. Mrs Y complains the Council failed to respond to her formal complaint about this matter.
3. Mrs Y says she has gone to time and trouble complaining without receiving an answer. She says the actions of the Council officer meant she did not think the appeal process was fair and just.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the information and documents provided by Mrs Y and the Council. I spoke to Mrs Y about her complaint.
7. Mrs Y and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

Secondary school admissions and appeals

8. Parents and carers have the right to appeal an admission authority’s decision not to offer their child a school place.  
9. Appeal hearings must be held in private and conducted in the presence of all panel members and parties. Appeal panels must act according to the principles of natural justice. 
10. The admission authority must provide a presenting officer at the hearing to explain the decision not to admit the child and to answer questions from the appellant and panel. 
11. Appeal panels must allow appellants the opportunity to appear in person and present their case.  
12. Panels must follow a two-stage decision making process. 
13. Stage 1: the panel examines the decision to refuse admission. The panel must consider whether: 

• the admissions arrangements complied with the mandatory requirements set out in the School Admissions Code; 
• the admission arrangements were applied correctly; and if 
• the admission of additional children would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.  

14. If a panel decides that admitting further children would “prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources” they move to the second stage of the process. 
15. Stage 2: balancing the arguments. The panel must balance the prejudice to the school against the appellant’s case for the child to be admitted.  

What happened

16. In June 2020, the panel dismissed Mrs Y’s appeal about B’s secondary school placement.
17. At the end of June, Mrs Y says she complained to the Council about the conduct of the Council’s presenting officer.
18. In September, Mrs Y complained to the Ombudsman. She said the Council had failed to respond to her complaint.
19. In October, the Ombudsman sent the Council information on Mrs Y’s complaint and asked the Council to confirm whether the complaint had completed its complaints process. This is because the law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))
20. At the end of October, the Ombudsman chased the Council for a response.
21. At the beginning of November, the Council asked the Ombudsman for more time to reply.
22. Later in November, the Ombudsman chased the Council for a reply.
23. A week later, the Council replied to say it had a record of a draft stage one response for Mrs Y’s complaint, but it was not clear whether this had been sent. The Council said it would get back to the Ombudsman.
24. At the end of November, the Ombudsman chased the Council for an update about the Council’s progress in considering Mrs Y’s complaint. When the Ombudsman did not receive a response, we progressed Mrs Y’s complaint to the Investigation stage of the process.

Analysis – was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

25. The Council’s corporate complaints procedure says the Council, under stage one of the process, will: “always aim to provide you with a full written response within 20 working days of the date your complaint was made. There may be some occasions when this is not possible, so we may need to extend the timescale slightly, but we will always ensure that you are kept updated about the timescale that we are working towards.”
26. The Council has failed to meet its set timescales for responding to Mrs Y’s complaint. It has failed to keep her updated when there were delays in responding. This is fault. This caused Mrs Y uncertainty.
27. In these circumstances, to remedy this injustice, I have recommended the Council now considers Mrs Y’s complaint under its complaints procedure.

Back to top

Agreed action

28. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. apologise to Mrs Y for the delays in considering her complaint;
2. consider Mrs Y’s complaint under its complaints process starting with a stage one complaint response; and,
3. make Mrs Y a payment of £100 for the uncertainty caused by the fault.
29. The Ombudsman will need to see evidence that these actions have been completed.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have completed my investigation.
31. I have decided to uphold Mrs Y’s complaint because there was fault by the Council in its complaint handling causing injustice. The above recommendations are suitable ways for the Council to remedy this, which it has agreed to.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman