Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr A’s complaint that the school admission appeal panel was at fault in refusing his appeal for a school place for his daughter. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Ms A, complains that the school admission appeal panel was at fault in refusing his appeal for a school place for his daughter.

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 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered what Mr A has said in support of his complaint and the appeal documents provided by the Council.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr A applied for a school place for his daughter for admission to the Reception year group in September 2019. The Council received more applications for his preferred school than it had places available, so it applied its oversubscription policy. Mr A’s family changed address after he submitted the application. As such, his amended application was treated as late and was refused. Mr A already has a child at the school and the application would have been successful if it had been treated as though it had been made on time.
5. Mr A appealed against the Council's decision. He made a written submission and attended the appeal hearing to make his case in person. He set out why his family had been forced to change address and why he wanted his daughter to attend the school. He also provided supporting information referring to his other child’s special educational needs.
6. The school admission appeal panel refused Mr A's appeal. He believes the panel failed to give sufficient weight to his grounds of appeal. He wants the Council to reconsider the matter and allocate his daughter a place at the school.
7. Independent school admission appeals panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. The law says the size of an infant class must not be more than 30 pupils per teacher. There are only limited circumstances in which more than 30 children can be admitted. There are special rules governing appeals for Reception and Years 1 and 2. Appeals under these rules are known as “infant class size appeals”. The rules say the panel must consider whether:
    

• admitting another child would breach the class limit;
• the admission arrangements comply with the law:
• the admission arrangements were properly applied to the case:
• the decision to refuse a place was one which a reasonable authority would have made in the circumstances.

8. What is ‘unreasonable’ is a high test. The panel needs to be sure that to refuse a place was “perverse” or “outrageous”. For that reason panels rarely find an admission authority’s decision to be unreasonable. 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.
9. The clerk’s notes of Mr A's appeal hearing show that the panel considered the points he made in support of his appeal. It decided that none of the limited grounds on which it could allow the appeal applied. The weight the panel members chose to give to Mr A’s evidence was a matter for them, not the Ombudsman. Without evidence of fault the Ombudsman cannot criticise the panel's decision or intervene to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman