Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Jewish Community Secondary School

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 25-023-242 Sector Education Category School Admissions Decided 25 March 2026

Full decision

on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.

Category : Education > School admissions Decision : Closed after initial enquiries Decision date : 25 Mar 2026

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful school admission appeal. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

Ms X complains about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her child, Y. She says she is dissatisfied with the outcome and believes the School has not taken Y’s needs into consideration. Ms X says this has caused Y to suffer.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant and the school.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Ms X applied to transfer Y to the School. There were no places available in the relevant year group, so the School declined her application.

Ms X says the School didn’t consider the information provided to support a school move for Y. She appealed the decision.

The appeal panel notes show that the panel considered the information provided by both Y’s parents and the school. The panel decided the prejudice to the school and its pupils by admitting another child was significant enough to decline the appeal. That was a matter for the professional judgement of the panel members.

Although Ms X disagrees with the outcome, this is not evidence of fault. We do not act as an appeal body and can only consider if there was evidence of fault in the way in which the school made the decision. There is no such evidence. That being the case, it is not for the Ombudsman to criticise the decision the appeal panel made, or intervene to substitute an alternative view.

Final decision

We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Jewish Community Secondary School

Reference Date Summary Outcome
24-021-470 29 Sep 2025 Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Independent Admissions Appeals Panel conducted the appeal for a school place for … Not Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation