Summary: A parent complained about the school admission appeal panel’s decision to turn down his appeal regarding the refusal of a school place for his daughter. But the Ombudsman does not have grounds to investigate this matter because there is no sign of fault in the way the panel made its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr X, complained about the school admission appeal panel’s decision to turn down his appeal regarding the refusal of a place for his daughter (‘Y’) at his preferred secondary school (‘the School’). In particular Mr X felt the panel did not take enough account of his appeal case relating to Y’s health condition.

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 Mr X provided with his complaint and his comments in response to a draft version of this decision. I also took account of documents from the School about Mr X’s appeal.

Back to top

What I found

5. This summer Mr X’s family moved into the area from another part of the country. As a result Mr X applied for a place for Y at a local secondary school starting in September 2019.
6. The School was Mr X’s first preference as it is close to the family home. But the School turned down his application because Y’s year group was already full. Mr X was also turned down by his second preference school for the same reason.
7. Mr X appealed about the refusal of a place at the School. But the independent appeal panel turned down his appeal. Mr X then complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

8. 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.

9. The panel for Mr X’s appeal decided that the School’s admission arrangements were lawful and correctly applied in Y’s case. The panel also agreed with the School’s case that accepting an extra child would cause prejudice to the School and the children already going there.
10. From the evidence provided about Mr X’s appeal I did not see any sign of fault in the way the panel considered these two matters. As a result I consider the panel was reasonably entitled to reach the conclusions it did based on the information presented to it at the appeal.
11. Mr & Mrs X attended the appeal hearing to present their case. This related mainly to Y’s health condition. In particular Mr & Mrs X said Y suffers from anxiety and a phobia concerning noise. They said as a result of this condition Y could not travel on a bus, so she needed a school within easy walking distance of home. Mr & Mrs X also pointed out that they were having to educate Y at home at present, but this was not a satisfactory alternative and Y really needed to be in school with other children.
12. However the panel decided that Mr & Mrs X’s case for Y to have a place at the School did not outweigh the School’s case on prejudice. Therefore it refused their appeal.
13. But having examined the records from Mr & Mrs X’s appeal hearing I am not convinced that there is any sign of fault in the way the panel considered and decided their case.
14. In particular, I consider the appeal clerk’s notes from the hearing and the panel’s decision-making, and its decision letter, show that panel members understood and took suitable account of the information Mr & Mrs X provided and the case they presented at the hearing. It also seems the panel gave Mr & Mrs X a reasonable opportunity to make their case at the hearing, and explored relevant issues with them in their questions on the day.
15. Mr X felt he and his wife had made a strong case for Y to be given a place at the School. So he 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 read and heard from both sides at the appeal. However I see no sign of fault in the appeal process or in the way the panel reached its decision in Mr X’s case. Therefore I have concluded that we would not be justified in investigating his complaint.

Final decision

17. The Ombudsman does not have grounds to start an investigation of Mr X’s complaint about the appeal panel’s decision to turn down his appeal for a place for Y at the School. This is because there is no sign of fault by the panel in the way it dealt with Mr X’s case.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman