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

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss A, complains that the school admission appeal panel was at fault in refusing her appeal for a school place for her 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 Miss A has said in support of her complaint and the appeal documents provided by the Council. I have also considered Miss A’s response to my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Miss A applied for a school place for her son for admission to the Reception year group in September 2019. She made her application just after the published closing date for applications. Her application was therefore treated as late. As the school was oversubscribed with applications received on time, the Council refused Miss A’s application.
5. Miss A appealed against the Council’s decision and attended the appeal hearing to make her case. She set out the difficulties she would be caused by having children at different schools. She also submitted medical information in support of her appeal. The school admission appeal panel refused Miss A’s appeal. She complains that it did not give proper consideration to her case.
6. Independent school admission appeals panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. The law says the size of an infant class must not be more than 30 pupils per teacher. There are only limited circumstances in which more than 30 children can be admitted. There are special rules governing appeals for Reception and Years 1 and 2. Appeals under these rules are known as “infant class size appeals”. The rules say the panel must consider whether:
    

• admitting another child would breach the class size limit;
• the admission arrangements comply with the law:
• the admission arrangements were properly applied to the case:
• the decision to refuse a place was one which a reasonable authority would have made in the circumstances.

7. What is ‘unreasonable’ is a high test. The panel needs to be sure that to refuse a place was “perverse” or “outrageous”. For that reason panels rarely find an admission authority’s decision to be unreasonable.
8. 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.
9. Miss A points out that the evidence the Council presented at the appeal hearing indicated that her application was received later than was in fact the case. She argues that this disadvantaged her as another late application, received after hers, was given priority and allocated a place. She also complains that the Council failed to offer her son a place when one became available after the beginning of term.
10. The evidence shows that the application date was corrected at the appeal hearing and the appeal panel considered the admissions of the other children. It decided that the children had been properly admitted ahead of Mrs A’s son. That was their decision to make.
11. The clerk’s notes of Miss A’s appeal show that she was able to make her case and the panel considered it. There is no evidence of fault in the way it did so. The weight the panel gave to Miss A’s case was a matter for their judgement, not the Ombudsman. In the absence of evidence of fault, the Ombudsman cannot intervene to criticise the decision the Council made, or substitute an alternative view.
12. Miss A points out that the school has had more than 30 pupils in infant classes. She therefore argues that the Reception group can cope with another pupil. That conclusion does not follow. The legal class size limit can be exceeded in certain specific circumstances. None of those circumstances apply in this case.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman