Ombudsman criticises failure by council to consider request from mother for summer born daughter to start reception after fifth birthday

As a result of the investigation, the council has agreed to send the mother an apology, reconsider her request, and provide guidance to Delay Panel members about the “correct approach” for deciding this type of application.

It will also "review its published arrangements policy and online guidance to ensure [it is] legally correct", the Ombudsman said.

The woman behind the complaint, Mrs Y, complained that the council wrongly refused her request for her summer born daughter to start Reception class at school in September 2026 after her fifth birthday.

The mother had requested this because her daughter would only just have turned four if she started in 2025; she believed her daughter was too young to start in 2025; her daughter was already at a disadvantage because of disabled family members; she was not toilet trained, and she received help with her speech.

Requests to the council for a delayed start to school are decided by the Delay Panel (the panel). The panel considered Mrs Y's request in February 2025.

The Ombudsman noted: “The minutes show the panel noted while her daughter did not have to start statutory school until the summer after her fifth birthday, she would not automatically get a place in Reception.”

A panel member also noted the daughter had no significant Special Educational Needs and Disability needs and ‘did not see an issue with [her daughter] starting school this year’. Another panel member said she felt it was possible for the daughter to, ‘enter into reception this year’.

The panel refused Mrs Y’s request for a delayed entry to Reception until September 2026.

In March, Mrs Y complained to the council about this decision. She said the panel had not applied the correct test when deciding her application.

The following month, the council sent her its stage 1 response which said the panel had considered the request and told her its decision.

Mrs Y asked for her complaint to go to stage 2 of its complaints process. Towards the end of the month, the council sent her its stage 2 response. This wrongly referred to the panel deciding she should start in Year 1 in 2026, not 2025 which is what the panel decided.

Considering the case, the Ombudsman said: “Parents of summer born children can ask for their child to start school at age 5 in Reception. The council must then decide if, after reaching the compulsory school age, it would be in the child’s best interests to start in Reception or Year 1. When reaching this decision, it must take account of all relevant considerations. It must consider the potential impact on the child of being admitted to Year 1 without first completing Reception.”

The report noted that when the council considered Mrs Y’s application for a delayed start to school, it went on to consider whether it was in her child’s best interests to start Reception in 2025. It decided it was in her best interests to do so.

However, the Ombudsman found that the council failed to consider what was in the child’s best interests when she started school in 2026. Therefore, the council applied the wrong test.

The Ombudsman said: “The council needed to consider the potential impact of her daughter being admitted into Year 1 without first completing Reception in 2026 and why it would be in the child’s best interests to miss Reception. I am satisfied the evidence does not show the council properly considered this. This was fault.”

Finally, the report found that the complaint procedure failed to identify this error at either stage 1 or stage 2.

The Ombudsman said: “The stage 1 response merely told her the panel had considered the request and told her of its decision. The stage 2 decision confusingly referred to the panel deciding her daughter should start Year 1 in 2026. What the panel had decided was she would start school in Reception in 2025.”

To remedy the injustice caused, the council was recommended to:

• send Mrs Y a written apology for the injustice caused by failing to properly consider her request; failing to identify any problem with the process when it dealt with her formal complaint about it
• reconsider Mrs Y’s request for her daughter to be admitted out of the normal age group to Reception starting in September 2026. “The council should consider whether it would be in her best interests to start in Reception or Year 1. If it does not agree with her request, it should clearly explain why it considers it is in her best interests to miss Reception”
• review its published admission arrangements policy and online guidance to ensure this reflects the School Admissions Code and the non-statutory guidance about making decisions on requests for delayed entry
• provide guidance to panel members about the correct approach to follow when deciding delayed entry applications for summer born children
• ensure the complainant's daughter does not lose a place at the preferred school for September 2026 due to the identified failings.

Herefordshire Council has been approached for comment.

Lottie Winson