Summary: Mrs X complained about how an admission appeal panel dealt with her appeal for a school place for her son. We have decided not to investigate the complaint further. This is because the Council has already agreed to offer Mrs X a fresh hearing and further investigation is unlikely to achieve any more for her.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the way the independent appeal panel dealt with her appeal for a school place for her son. She says the panel did not consider all her circumstances properly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’ We cannot question whether an independent school admissions appeals panel’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider if there was fault in the way the decision was reached. If we find fault, which calls into question the panel’s decision, we may ask for a new appeal hearing. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. For example we may decide not to continue with an investigation if we consider:
• we could not add to any previous investigation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a better outcome than the complainant has already achieved. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I discussed the complaint with Mrs X and considered the information she provided. I made enquiries of the Council. I considered the Council’s response to the Ombudsman’s decision on another complaint about an appeal for the same school.
5. I gave Mrs X and the Council an opportunity to comment on my draft decision before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

School admission appeals

6. Parents have the right to appeal against a decision to refuse admission to a school. The School Admission Appeals Code (‘the Code’) is statutory guidance for admission authorities and appeal panels to follow in arranging and deciding admission appeals.
7. When making the decision, panels must follow a two-stage decision making process. At stage 1, the panel examines the decision to refuse admission. The panel must consider whether:

• the admission arrangements comply with the law;
• the admission arrangements were properly applied to the case;
• admitting another child would prejudice the education of others.

8. If the panel finds there would be prejudice, the panel must then move to the second stage and consider each appellant’s individual arguments. If the panel decides the appellant’s case outweighs the prejudice to the school, it must uphold the appeal.
9. Under the Code, the role of the clerk to the appeal panel includes making an accurate record of the proceedings, including the reasons for the panel’s decision.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic

10. Temporary regulations and guidance introduced changes to appeal arrangements because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Where face-to-face appeals cannot take place safely, hearings can be conducted by telephone or video conference. Where the panel decides that remote hearings cannot be conducted fairly, it may decide the appeals based on written submissions only.

What happened

11. Mrs X applied for a place for her son in Year 7 at School 1. Her application was rejected and she appealed.
12. There were over 20 appeals for School 1. The appeal panel decided to hold the first stage as a grouped hearing on the papers only. The second stage individual hearings took place by teleconference.
13. Mrs X’s appeal was unsuccessful and she complained to the Ombudsman. During the course of this investigation the Ombudsman decided a complaint from another complainant who had had an unsuccessful appeal for a place at School 1. The decision in that case included a finding that the clerk failed to make a proper record of the panel’s decision at stage 1. There was no record of the panel deciding any of the three key questions relevant to a stage 1 decision. The Ombudsman also found fault with the decision-making and record of the stage 2 hearing.
14. The Council accepted the Ombudsman’s recommendation to review all the decisions the appeal panel made in the same set of hearings for School 1. Where the panel refused the appeal, it would offer the appellant the chance of another hearing. The Council has confirmed that as a result of this process it has offered Mrs X a fresh hearing.
15. The Council also agreed to:
• remind clerks of the need to make proper records of the stage 1 and 2 hearings;
• remind appeal panels of the need to carry out a proper assessment of the issues at stage 2; and
• consider the training needs of clerks and appeal panel members.

Analysis

16. The Council has offered Mrs X a fresh hearing. It is unlikely I could achieve any more for her by investigating the complaint further. The offer of another hearing would be a suitable remedy if I were to investigate further and find fault. In this case I am likely to find fault at stage 1. This is because the panel made one decision on all the appeals in a grouped hearing. So I would be looking at the same decision as in the other complaint. I do not consider further investigation into what happened at stage 2 is necessary as it would not achieve a better remedy for Mrs X than the Council has already offered. The Council has also already agreed to improve its procedures.

Back to top

Final decision

17. For these reasons I have decided to discontinue my investigation. Neither Mrs X nor the Council objected.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman