Summary: A parent complained about the way the school admission appeal panel dealt with her appeal concerning the refusal of a place for her daughter at her preferred secondary school. But the Ombudsman does not have reason to investigate this complaint because there is no sign of fault by the panel.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Miss B, complained that the school admission appeal panel did not take enough account of her appeal case and the emotional well-being of her daughter (‘C’) in deciding her appeal for a place at her preferred secondary school (‘School X’).

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 provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Miss B provided with her complaint and her comments in response to a draft of this decision. I also considered documents from the Council about Miss B’s appeal.

Back to top

What I found

5. C is due to start at secondary school in September.
6. When Miss B applied for a school place for C she listed School X as her first preference. But Miss B’s application was turned down. This was because all the places at School X were taken by children with a higher priority than C under the admission criteria. In particular the successful children were either in care, had a sibling at School X, or lived nearer to it than C did.
7. C was also turned down for Miss B’s other preferred schools. The Council instead offered C a place at another local school (‘School Y’) which Miss B had not applied for.
8. Miss B appealed about School X’s refusal of a place for C. School X asked the Council to arrange an independent appeal panel to hear the appeal. But the panel rejected Miss B’s appeal. She then complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

9. Appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal for a secondary school place. In particular the panel must consider whether:

• the admission arrangements comply with the law;
• the admission arrangements were properly applied to the child in question.

It must then consider whether admitting another child would prejudice the education of others. If the panel find there would be prejudice it must then consider the appellant’s arguments. If the panel decides the appellant’s case outweighs the prejudice to the school, it must uphold the appeal.

10. The panel for Miss B’s appeal decided that School X’s admission arrangements were lawful and correctly applied in C’s case. In addition the panel accepted School X’s case that taking an extra child would cause prejudice to the School and to the education of the children already going there.
11. From the evidence I have seen about Miss B’s appeal, I consider the panel had good reason to reach those views based on the information presented to it. As a result I do not see any sign of fault in the way the panel dealt with the first part of the appeal process in Miss B’s case.
12. Miss B attended the hearing to present her appeal case. This mainly related to the adverse impact on C from a recent family bereavement and other difficult circumstances the family was facing. Miss B also referred to her family’s close connections with School X and the educational benefits C would gain from going there rather than to School Y.
13. However, the panel decided that Miss B’s case for C’s admission did not outweigh School X’s case on prejudice if she was admitted. Therefore it turned down her appeal.
14. Miss B felt she had put forward strong reasons for C to be given a place at School X so she was understandably disappointed by the panel’s decision. But having considered the records from the appeal hearing I have reached the view that there is no sign of fault in the way the panel considered her case.
15. In particular I consider that the appeal clerk’s notes from the hearing and the panel’s decision making, and its decision letter, indicate that the panel members understood and took suitable account of the case Miss B put forward in her appeal letter and at the hearing. It also appears the panel gave Miss B a reasonable opportunity to explain about her case, and that panel members explored the issues with her in their questions at the hearing.
16. However, at the end of the day the panel was entitled to reach its own view about the appeal having weighed up the information it had received from both sides. But I have seen no sign of fault in the way the panel reached its decision, or in any other part of the appeal process, in Miss B’s case.

Final decision

17. The Ombudsman does not have reason to investigate Miss B’s complaint about the way the appeal panel dealt with her appeal concerning the refusal of a place for her daughter at School X. This is because there is no sign of fault in the panel’s consideration of the case.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman