Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs A’s complaint that the school admission appeal panel was at fault in refusing her appeal for a school place for her 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 Mrs A, complains that the school admission appeal panel was at fault in refusing her appeal for a school place for her 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 Mrs A has said in support of her complaint and the appeal documents provided by the Council. I have also considered Mrs A’s response to my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs A applied for a school place for her daughter for admission to the Reception year group in September 2019. She submitted her application late. As the Council had already allocated the places available at the school, it refused Mrs A’s application. Mrs A has another child at the school and her application would have been successful if made on time.
5. Mrs A appealed against the Council’s decision to refuse her application. She made a written submission in support of her appeal and attended the hearing to make her case in person. The school admission appeal panel refused Mrs A’s appeal. Mrs A complains that the panel was at fault, and that its decision was flawed.
6. Independent school admission appeal 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 size 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.

7. 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.
8. 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. Mrs A argues that the appeal panel was not sufficiently diverse. She feels this lack of diversity may have disadvantaged her.
10. The statutory guidance governing school admission appeal panels sets out a number of requirements relating to the composition of panels. There is no evidence to suggest that the Council has failed to abide by thee requirements and no grounds for the Ombudsman to intervene.
11. Mrs A argues that the Council failed to give sufficient weight to her daughter’s medical condition. She believes it should have adjourned the hearing to obtain further medical evidence.
12. Whether the evidence Mrs A presented was sufficient for the panel members to reach a decision was a matter for them. The weight panel members give to the evidence before them is a matter for their judgement, not for the Ombudsman. The clerk’s notes of Mrs A’s appeal hearing show that the panel members considered the evidence and took the view that none of the grounds on which they could uphold the appeal applied. That was their decision to make.
13. In support of her complaint, Mrs A argues that the documents the Council presented at the appeal hearing contained errors. I attach no significance to this. The evidence shows that there was an error in the paperwork but that this was corrected at the hearing. The panel was clearly aware of the reason for the Council’s decision to refuse Mrs A’s application, and was entitled to conclude that the Council has demonstrated that the year group was full.
14. There is no evidence of fault in the way the panel considered the questions before it. In the absence of fault in the way the panel made its decision, the Ombudsman cannot intervene to criticise the decision or to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman