Home > Publications > Selected cases — Parliamentary > Selected Cases and Summaries of Completed Investigations: April 2001 to September 2001 > Case No. C.1013/01
Selected Cases and Summaries of Completed Investigations
PCA 6th Report – Session 2001-2002
Chapter 2 DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND SKILLS
Handling of an application for designation as a specialist sports college
Dr L and Mr Z complained about the way in which the former Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) had handled an application by a named school (the college) for designation as a specialist sports college. They contended that designation had resulted in planning permission for a new access road and car park which would blight their properties, and for which the college would not have sought planning permission if DfEE had not approved designation. The Ombudsman found that DfEE had accepted sponsorship pledged conditionally, although such sponsorship was ineligible under the rules that had applied at the time. The Ombudsman also found other important shortcomings in DfEE’s handling of the college’s sponsorship. He was, however, satisfied that DfEE would, in all likelihood, have allowed the college to find replacement sponsorship had they disallowed the ineligible pledges prior to designation. He was also satisfied that DfEE’s decision in June 2000 to disallow a pledge and to allow the college to find replacement sponsorship had been consistent with decisions taken in other cases. However, he considered that DfEE should have reached their decision at a much earlier stage. The Ombudsman found that DfEE’s handling of Dr L’s and Mr Z’s correspondence could have been better, criticising in particular the handling of a letter of 19 June 2000 from Dr L to the then Secretary of State for Education and Employment; however, he considered that DfEE had answered the broad thrust of the complex issues raised in the correspondence. He accepted that the nature of the voluminous questions had made it difficult for DfEE to reply quickly. The Ombudsman did not uphold the complaint that DfEE had lacked appropriate procedures, and found no evidence that a DfEE officer had interfered in the planning process. The Ombudsman was satisfied that development at the college did not stem solely from designation: the college had been endeavouring to develop for some time prior to designation becoming an issue.
Previous < Contents > Next
Back to top
|
