Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel and so we cannot question the merits of its decision.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place for her son (Y). She is unhappy members of the panel had heard previous appeals Mrs X had attended.

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 considered Mrs X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the papers from her appeal. I also gave Mrs X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs X applied for her son to transfer to Year 9 at School Z. Because there were no places at School Z, the Council refused her application. Mrs X appealed the decision not to offer Y a place. Mrs X has previously applied and appealed for places in Years 7 and 8 at School Z.
5. During the appeal, the Council’s representative explained why it had not offered Mrs X’s son a place at School Z. They explained the difficulties admitting a further child would cause the school. There was an opportunity for the panel and Mrs X to ask questions.
6. Independent appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. They need to consider if the school’s admission arrangements comply with the law, and if they were properly applied to the appellant’s application. They need to decide if admitting further children would “prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.” If they think it would, they need to consider if an appellant’s arguments outweigh the prejudice to the school.
7. The panel decided the school’s admission arrangements complied with the law and had been properly applied to Mrs X’s application. They decided that admitting further children would cause prejudice to the school.
8. During the appeal, Mrs X explained her eldest child had recently left School Z, and her youngest child was due to start Year 7 in September. Mrs X provided the panel with information in support of her appeal. Mrs X explained why she wanted Y to attend School Z.
9. The clerk’s notes show the panel considered Mrs X’s reasons for wanting her son to attend School Z. The notes show the panel decided the evidence put forward by Mrs X was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting a further child would cause the school. The clerk wrote to Mrs X to explain the panel’s decision. The letter sets out the points raised during the appeal and matches the clerk’s notes.
10. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body and we cannot criticise decisions taken without fault. Mrs X is unhappy two members of the panel had heard her appeals in previous years – but this is not prevented by the School Admission Appeals Code. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider Mrs X’s appeal. The panel considered the information it was presented with and the decision to refuse Mrs X’s appeal is one it was entitled to take.
11. I understand Mrs X is disappointed with the panel’s decision. But without evidence of fault in how the panel reached its decision, there are no grounds for the Ombudsman to become involved. An investigation is not therefore appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel and so we cannot question the merits of its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman