Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms 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. Ms X complains about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place.

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

Back to top

What I found

4. Ms X has recently moved into the area. Ms X applied for a place at The Priory School (TPS) for her daughter through her local council. TPS is a foundation school and so the governing body is the admission authority – this means it has responsibility for admissions. Because there were no places at TPS, the governing body refused Ms X’s application. In line with its published scheme, the Council offered Ms X’s daughter a place at the nearest school with vacancies.
5. Ms X wrote to the Council to say she was concerned TPS had not taken into account her daughter’s academic ability when it considered her application. The Council explained TPS was not a selective school, and so a child’s academic ability could not be taken into account.
6. Ms X appealed the decision not to offer her daughter a place at TPS. During the appeal, the school’s representative explained why it was not possible to offer Ms X’s daughter a place. They explained the difficulties admitting a further child would cause. Ms X and the panel had the opportunity to ask questions.
7. 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.
8. The panel decided the school’s admission arrangements complied with the law and had been properly applied to Ms X’s application. They decided that admitting further children would cause prejudice to the school. The clerk’s notes show Ms X had the opportunity to present her case. She explained the difficulties it would cause if her daughter could not attend TPS. The panel decided the evidence put forward by Ms X was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting a further child would cause the school.
9. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body and we cannot criticise decisions taken without fault. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider Ms X’s appeal. It considered the information it was presented with. It is for panels to decide what weight should be given to each piece of evidence. The decision to refuse Ms X’s appeal is one the panel was entitled to take. The clerk’s notes match the decision letter sent to Ms X.
10. I understand Ms 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

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms 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