Resolved: Summer camp organiser placed in financial difficulty by flawed school rental process

Resolved: Summer camp organiser placed in financial difficulty by flawed school rental process

Published September 09, 2025

The Complaint

In July 2025, a private organisation running an annual children’s summer camp at Ħaż-Żebbuġ Primary School lodged a complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman. The organiser explained that after confirming the camp dates with the school in January, she was initially quoted around €1,067 to cover electricity costs. Based on this estimate, she prepared her budget and informed parents of the fees.

In March, she was advised that new rates had been introduced and the revised cost for the rental of the premises would be €2,650. This amount was again factored into her planning and communicated to parents. However, despite repeated efforts between April and June to finalise a rental contract, she was told that contracts were being revised and temporarily on hold.

On 26 June, less than three weeks before the camp was due to start, she received an invoice of €5,229 from the Head of College Network – nearly five times the original estimate. She argued that this lack of transparency placed her organisation in an impossible financial position, given her prior commitments to parents.

The Investigation

The Commissioner for Education, Chief Justice Emeritus Vincent De Gaetano, noted that the Permanent Secretary within the Ministry for Education was quick to recognise the maladministration. To mitigate the impact, the Ministry offered a 40% discount on the rental fee (excluding utilities) and agreed to apply 2024 rates rather than the 2025 ones.

The investigation revealed that in April 2024, the Ministry had issued a new Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) governing the use of school premises by third parties. However, this SOP was not effectively communicated to the relevant school officers. Although the SOP was “re-circulated internally” in February 2025, it created further uncertainty and confusion, leaving the school unable to provide the complainant with accurate guidance.

It also emerged that the newly established College Board at St Ignatius College only held its first meeting to evaluate rental requests on 25 June 2025 – just two weeks before the summer camp began. This delay meant the complainant had no clear information until the very last moment. The Ombudsman further criticised the attitude of the College administration, which had implied that the complainant may have benefited from “discounts” in previous years, even though she had always paid the full invoiced amounts.

Conclusion

On 11 July 2025, a final contract was signed by all parties with the reduced rental fee applied. While the Education Authorities are entitled to set rental rates and conditions, the lack of clear communication and the late decisions created unnecessary uncertainty and financial pressure. This amounted to maladministration under Article 22(1)(a) and (d) of the Ombudsman Act.

The complaint was therefore upheld. Given the Ministry’s prompt recognition of the maladministration and its corrective action, no further recommendations were issued.

This case is being published in accordance with Article 29(2) of the Ombudsman Act.