Summary: Mrs F complains a school admission appeals panel failed to properly consider her appeal for a place for her son, G. There is evidence of fault and the school has agreed to offer Mrs F a fresh appeal.

The complaint

1. Mrs F complained a school admission appeals panel failed to properly consider her appeal for a place for her son, G.

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 whether a school admission appeal 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. (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 that 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 spoke to Mrs F on the telephone and considered the information, which had been sent to us. I have accessed the school admissions appeals code. I sent Mrs F and the school a copy of this draft decision and took comments they make into account before reaching a decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mrs F applied for a place at the school for G, where his sister already attended. G was not allocated a place. Once she received the refusal, Mrs F was able to ask for an appeal.
7. Appeals are carried out by independent panels. These panels must follow the school admissions appeals code (2012) when considering an appeal. The panel must consider whether:
1. the admission arrangements comply with the law;
2. the admission arrangements were properly applied to the case; and,
3. whether admitting another child would prejudice the education of others.
8. If the panel finds there would be prejudice it must 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. However, the Ombudsman looks for evidence that the judgement reached is based on relevant matters.
10. The panel decided the admission arrangements complied with the law, that the admission arrangements were properly applied in G’s case and that there would be prejudice if additional pupils were allowed into the school. I consider the panel had good reasons to conclude this.
11. The panel then had to consider Mrs F’s specific case.
12. Mrs F made several points to the panel. In particular, she explained her daughter had been so seriously bullied at the school G had been allocated to that the police had become involved and she had threatened to take her own life. As a result, she had moved to this school and was thriving. The bullies still attended G’s allocated school and Mrs F was concerned G would be targeted.
13. After the parent presents their case, the panel decides, in private, whether the prejudice to the child is greater than the prejudice to the school in having to accept an additional pupil.
14. From the clerk’s notes, I have concerns about the way the panel considered some of the issues raised. My main concern, however, is with the second point on the notes. This says the school’s overriding responsibility is to accept Catholic children of which there are 55 on the waiting list. Other children’s cases are irrelevant to the weighing of prejudice, as is the number of children on the waiting list. This is fault. It shows G’s case was not considered on its own merits. As a result, the school has agreed to offer Mrs F a fresh appeal.

Agreed action

15. The school will offer Mrs F a fresh appeal with a new panel and clerk. It will arrange this as soon as possible and hold the appeal within a month of the date of this decision

Back to top

Final decision

16. There is evidence of fault leading to injustice. The school agreed to remedy this by offering Mrs F a fresh appeal

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman