Summary: A parent complained about the school admission appeal panel’s decision to turn down her appeal regarding a place for her son at her preferred primary school. But the Ombudsman does not have reason to investigate the complaint because there is no sign of fault by the panel in the way it made its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mrs B, complained about the school admission appeal panel’s decision to turn down her appeal regarding a place for her son (‘C’) at her preferred primary school (‘the School’). In particular Mrs B felt the panel did not take enough account of the fact that C’s sister (‘D’) already had a place at the School, and the problems she would have getting her children to and from two different schools.

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 Mrs B provided with her complaint. I also gave Mrs B an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision before I reached a final view in her case. In addition, I took account of documents from the Council about Mrs B’s appeal.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mrs B recently moved house. As a result she applied for her children to transfer to the School, which is the nearest to the new family home.
6. The Council offered a place at the School for D. But it turned down Mrs B’s application for C as his year group at the School was already full. Instead the Council offered C a place at another local primary school.
7. Mrs B appealed about the refusal of a place for C at the School. But the independent panel turned down her appeal. Mrs B then complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

8. Appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal for a primary school place in Years 3 to 6. 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.

9. The panel for Mrs B’s appeal decided that the Council’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been correctly applied in C’s case. The panel also agreed with the Council’s case that admitting another child would cause prejudice to the School and the children already there.
10. From the evidence provided about Mrs B’s appeal, I do not see any sign of fault in the way the panel considered these matters. In the circumstances I consider the panel was reasonably entitled to reach those conclusions based on the information presented to it at the appeal.
11. Mrs B went to the appeal hearing to present her case. This related mainly to the fact that D already had a place at the School. In addition, Mrs B referred to the problems she would have coping with the school run if her children had to go to different schools, especially as the other school the Council had offered C was much further from the family home.
12. However the panel decided that Mrs B’s case for C to be given a place at the School did not outweigh the Council’s case on prejudice. As a result it turned down her appeal.
13. But from the records of Mrs B’s appeal hearing I am not convinced that there is any sign of fault in the way the panel considered and decided her case.
14. In particular, I consider that the appeal clerk’s notes from the hearing and the panel’s decision making, and the panel’s decision letter, indicate that panel members understood and took suitable account of the case Mrs B presented at the appeal. It also seems the panel gave Mrs B a reasonable opportunity to make her case at the hearing. In addition, I note the panel checked with Mrs B at the end of the hearing to make sure she had said all she wanted to say.
15. Mrs B felt she had a good case for C to be given a place at the School. Therefore she was understandably disappointed by the panel’s decision.
16. But at the end of the day the panel was entitled to reach its own view having weighed up the information it heard from both sides at the appeal. However I have seen no sign of fault in the appeal process or in the way the panel reached its decision in Mrs B’s case. Therefore I have concluded that we do not have grounds to investigate her complaint about this matter.

Final decision

17. The Ombudsman does not have reason to investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the appeal panel’s decision to turn down her appeal regarding a place for her son at the School. This is because there is no sign of fault by the panel in the way it dealt with Mrs B’s case.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman