Summary: there was no fault in the way the Independent Appeal Panel made its decision not to admit Mr F’s daughter to School B.   The Ombudsman cannot question decisions made without fault.

The complaint

1. Mr F complains about his unsuccessful appeal for a place for his daughter, G, at School B. His application was late and he thinks it is unfair his daughter has been denied a place at the school as a result.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. The Ombudsman cannot question a school admission appeal panel’s decision simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider if there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3))
3. We check the Independent Appeal Panel followed the Code of Practice issued by the Department for Education and the hearing was fair.  We do this by examining the notes taken by the Clerk during the hearing.  We do not have the power to overturn the Panel’s decision, and we cannot give a child a place at the school. If we find fault, which calls the panel’s decision into question, we may ask for a new appeal hearing.
4. If we are satisfied with a panel’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

5. I have considered:
• Mr F’s comments;
• all the information presented to the Appeal Panel, the notes taken by the Clerk during the appeal, and the Panel’s decision letter following the appeal; and
• the School Admissions Appeals Code 2012.
6. I interviewed the Chair of the Appeal Panel by telephone.
7. I invited Mr F and the Council to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. School B is a Community Secondary School. The Council is the Admission Authority and is responsible for organising the Independent Appeal.
9. The School Admission Appeals Code 2012 issued by the Department for Education sets out the process the Independent Appeal Panel must follow when considering an appeal.
10. The Panel must first consider whether the Council has correctly applied the admission criteria to the application. Mr F’s application was unsuccessful because there were more applications than places at the school and all the places were filled by children who had more priority according to the school’s oversubscription criteria. Mr F’s application was late. The Council considers late applications once it has processed all on-time applications. By the time the Council considered Mr F’s application, all the places at the school had been allocated to pupils who applied on time. The Panel was satisfied that the admission criteria were correctly applied.
11. The Panel must then consider whether the school can accept any more pupils without disadvantaging those already given places. This is known as the case for prejudice. In the case of School B, the Panel accepted that the school was full and could not take extra pupils. Both the Panel and the parents had an opportunity to question the presenting officer. The decision that the school is full is a decision that the Panel is entitled to take, and there are no grounds for the Ombudsman to question it.
12. The Panel must then consider Mr F’s case for his daughter to be admitted to the school even though the school is full. This is known as the balancing stage where the prejudice to Mr F’s daughter if she is not given a place is balanced against the prejudice to the school if she is. The Clerk’s notes and the decision letter clearly record the written case Mr F submitted before the appeal and his discussions with the Panel at the hearing.
13. The Panel considered Mr F’s arguments but decided the prejudice to his daughter did not outweigh the prejudice to the school. This is a decision the Panel is entitled to take and there are no grounds for the Ombudsman to question it.
14. I interviewed the Chair of the Appeal Panel in order to better understand how the Panel had reached a decision. In particular, I wanted to know how the Panel considered the fact Mr F’s application was late. The Chair explained that Mr F told the Panel he did not receive notification of the deadline for applications from G’s primary school. However, the Panel noted the Council advertises the deadline in other ways, and Mr F already has an older child at School B so will have had experience of the application process. The Panel considered the reasons Mr F’s application was late but decided not to admit G to the school. This is a decision the Panel is entitled to take and there are no grounds for the Ombudsman to question it.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I have ended my investigation. I find the Panel heard Mr F’s appeal correctly and considered all the relevant information before coming to a decision. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions taken without fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman