Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr A’s complaint that the school admission appeal panel for a Foundation school was at fault in refusing his appeal for a school place for his son. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the admission authority’s part.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr A, complains that the school admission appeal panel for a Foundation school was at fault in refusing his appeal for a school place for his son.

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 Mr A has said in support of his complaint and the appeal documents provided by the admission authority.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr A applied for a place for his son in Year 8 at a Foundation school. The school’s governors are the admission authority for the school. As there were no vacancies in Year 8, they refused Mr A’s application.
5. Mr A used his right to appeal against the admission authority’s decision and attended the appeal hearing to make his case in person. He set out the negative impact on his son attending a school some distance from home and why he thought the school admission appeal panel should uphold his appeal.
6. The school admission appeal panel refused the appeal. Mr A wants the admission authority to reconsider and make a place available for his son.
7. Independent school admission appeals panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. The panel must consider whether:

• the admission arrangements comply with the law;
• the admission arrangements were properly applied to the case.

8. The panel must then consider whether admitting another child would prejudice the education of others. If the panel finds there would be prejudice the panel must then consider each appellant’s individual arguments. If the panel decides the appellant’s case outweighs the prejudice to the school, it must uphold the appeal.
9. 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.
10. The clerk’s notes of Mr A's appeal hearing show the panel considered the points he made in support of his appeal. There is no evidence of fault in the way it did so. The weight the panel members chose to give to Mr A’s evidence was a matter for them, not the Ombudsman. Without evidence of fault, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision the panel made or intervene to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the admission authority’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman