Reaching out to the Department of Basic education regarding the below matter as we are not winning with the department of education even after we provided proof of the previous placement

Good day We are really hoping for some assistance and we already bought school uniform for Rynfield primary as we had no communication of any changes until the 10 Nove 2025. Below is the appeal logged:

Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing to formally lodge a complaint regarding the placement of my child for Grade 1 in 2026. We app**** to Rynfield Primary School and received an offer, which we accepted within the required seven-day period. Following the instructions provided, we visited the school on 19 October 2025 for further details and were advised that we would receive an SMS with additional information. However, after not receiving any communication, we visited the school again on 10 November 2025. At that time, we were informed that the Department had made an error and accepted all applicants, and as a result, our child’s placement status was changed. This is deeply concerning because:

· The school is located two streets away from our home, making it the most practical and safe option for our child.

· We are guardians of two other children who currently attend Rynfield Primary School, and it is in the best interest of the child to attend the same school for stability and family support.

· We comp**** fully with all instructions and deadlines, and the error was caused by the Department’s system, not by us.

The alternative school offered is far from our home, which will create significant logistical and financial challenges. The feedback when we received also stating that the screenshot we have cannot be submitted as substantial evidence. Evidence attached “In terms of Section 5 of the South African Schools Act, 1996, our child is entitled to fair and transparent admission. The official SMS confirmation received constitutes valid proof of placement. Furthermore, PAJA guarantees the right to administrative fairness and review of decisions, which has not been fully respected in this case.”