Local Government Ombudsman

> | Accessiblity Options | Text Only | Text Size: A+ A- Reset | Links | Site Map

You are here: Home : : Complaint outcomes : : Education : : Education archive 2006-07 : : Rosebery School, Epsom (06A03333)

Quality and efficiency

Browser support

Browse aloud

Click here for speech assisted browser support

Downloads

Site tools

Files with this symbol pdf icon are in .pdf format. To view these files you will need the Adobe Acrobat Reader software. It can be downloaded below free of charge. Click To Download

adobe acrobat reader

Rosebery School, Epsom (06A03333)

School admissions                     Maladministration causing injustice

06 February 2007

Appeals against refusals of places at Rosebery School, Epsom, were very poorly handled. The Ombudsman upheld a mother’s complaint about the handling of her appeal, finding a number of procedural defects. As her daughter was committeed to another school and did not want a rehearing of the appeal, the Ombudsman recommended that the School apologise, pay £250 compensation, and thoroughly review its procedures to ensure compliance with government guidance.

‘Mrs Arthur’ complained about the way Rosebery School administered her appeal about its decision not to offer her daughter a place at the School. She said that the appeal was seriously flawed because of numerous procedural defects, and it did not comply with the statutory guidance in the Government’s School Admission Appeals Code of Practice.

The Ombudsman found that all the appeals against refusal of places were very poorly handled, although he could not say that Mrs Arthur’s appeal would have been successful had this not been so. Normally, he would have recommended that the School offer Mrs Arthur a fresh appeal, heard by a different panel, and the School offered to arrange this, but Mrs Arthur declined this as her daughter was now committed to another school.

The Ombudsman noted that he investigated another complaint from a parent in 2003, and brought to the School’s attention that its decision letters lacked sufficient detail. He said “I find it disappointing that the School has not revised its decision letters in line with the advice.” That complaint was settled by the offer of a fresh appeal.

The Ombudsman found maladministration causing injustice and recommended that the Governors of Rosebery School should offer Mrs Arthur a formal apology and pay her £250 compensation to remedy her injustice, and undertake a thorough review of its procedures to ensure proper compliance with the Code of Practice. In particular, attention should be given to a review of the following:

  • the selection of appeal panels;
  • the appeal venue and accommodation arrangements;
  • the clerking arrangements;
  • the timing of the panel’s decision making where there are multiple appeals;
  • appeal record keeping;
  • the content of appeal decision letters; and
  • the practice of holding an informal meeting with parents to discuss the Governors’ case before the appeal hearings.

The Governors indicated that they had noted the issues highlighted by this investigation, and they would review of the School’s procedures and change its practices. They also agreed to apologise to the complainant and pay her the recommended compensation.

Date Updated: 03/02/09