Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council was at fault in refusing his application and appeal for a school place for his 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 Mr B, complains that the Council was at fault in refusing his application and 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 B has said in support of his complaint, and the appeal documents provided by the Council.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr B applied for a Year 9 school place for his son. He did so because he believes his son can no longer attend his current school. He also has another son attending the school to which he applied. There were no Year 9 vacancies at the school, so the Council refused Mr B’s application.
5. Mr B appealed against the Council’s decision. He made a written submission in support of his appeal and attended the appeal hearing to make his case in person. The school admission appeal panel refused the appeal. Mr B believes it failed to consider the matter properly.
6. 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.

7. The panel must then consider whether admitting another child would prejudice the education of others.
8. 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. 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. The clerk’s notes of Mr B’s appeal hearing show that he was able to make his case in support of his appeal. There is no evidence of fault in the way the appeal panel considered it.
10. The evidence shows that the panel accepted Mr B’s contention that his son’s current school was no longer suitable for him. But it took the view that the circumstances did not merit upholding the appeal. That was a matter for their judgement and the Ombudsman cannot intervene to criticise the decision or 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 Council’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman