Summary: Mrs B complained that the School did not properly consider her appeal against the refusal for a place at the school for her daughter, C. The School has offered to re-hear the appeal.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complains that St Georges School (the School) did not properly consider the education admission appeal against the refusal of a place at the school for her daughter, C.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a school’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant, made enquiries of the School and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. I have written to Mrs B and the School with my draft decision and considered their comments.
5.  

Back to top

What I found

Appeals

6. Independent appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. The panel must consider whether:
• the admission arrangements comply with the law;
• the admission arrangements were properly applied to the case.
7. The panel must then consider whether admitting another child would prejudice the education of others.
8. If the panel finds there would be prejudice the panel must then 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. The Ombudsman does not question the merits of decisions properly taken. The panel is entitled to come to its own judgment about the evidence it hears.

What happened

10. Mrs B applied to a place at the School for her daughter C. She considered it would meet C’s needs and had been recommended by professionals. On the application form she said C had anxiety, was receiving counselling and had been referred to mental health services. The school refused the application on the grounds of distance from the school. Mrs B appealed. She said on the appeal form that her daughter was waiting to be assessed for a possible autistic spectrum disorder.
11. The appeal was held in June 2019. The clerk’s notes record that the Panel viewed C’s NHS assessment which had now taken place and confirmed she had an ASD diagnosis. Mrs B also explained C’s anxiety and the effects it had on her at school.
12. The record of the decision says that the Panel did not consider Mrs B’s reasons for wanting a place for C outweighed the prejudice caused to the education of the others at the school and refused the appeal. In the reasons it stated that C was awaiting an assessment for ASD. It repeated this in the decision letter, saying:

Your choice was made as you consider this school can best meet her learning and emotional needs as you continue to wait for the assessment for ASC.

13. Mrs B complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

14. The decision reasons do not reflect the evidence which Mrs B provided to the appeal panel. This was fault. Mrs B was left with the uncertainty as to whether the Panel properly considered her daughter’s appeal.

Agreed action

15. The School has agreed to offer Mrs B a fresh appeal hearing and has made arrangements for it to take place shortly.

Back to top

Final decision

16. I consider this is a fair and reasonable way of resolving the complaint and I have completed my investigation on this basis.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman