Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel failed to provide his child with a place at his preferred school. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault which caused them to lose out on a school place.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, says the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel did not properly consider his appeal for a place for his child, Z.

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 a 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)
3. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:
• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
4. This complaint involves events that occurred during the Covid-19 pandemic. The Government introduced a range of new and frequently updated rules and guidance during this time. We can consider whether the Council followed the relevant legislation, guidance and our published “Principles of Good Administrative Practice during Covid”.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information Mr X provided with his complaint. The Council provided me with the notes from the Appeal Panel hearing, the documents the Appeal Panel had and its decision letter. I considered Mr X’s comments on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

6. Mr X applied on time for his child, Z, to have a place at School Y from September 2020. After he applied he says he moved house from outside the catchment area to inside it.
7. There were more applicants than places. The Council applied the published admissions scheme to decide who should get the places. The last place went to a child who lived within the catchment area. The Council categorised Mr X’s application as if he lived outside the catchment area on the basis of his application form address. The Council offered Z a place at School D. This is around two miles from his current home.
8. Mr X appealed for a place at School Y. He said the Council had categorized his application wrong and Z had two elder siblings at School Y.
9. An independent appeal panel heard the appeal in June 2020 by telephone. It decided not to award a place. Mr X disagreed and complained to the Ombudsman.
10. Mr X says the appeal panel did not properly consider his case. He says it appears to be a bureaucratic decision for the school’s benefit and not Z’s. He wants his children to go to the same school.
11. The Council has since offered a place to Mr X as one became available. He has accepted it.

Analysis

The appeal panel’s and our role

12. Independent appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. The panel must consider whether the:
• admission arrangements comply with the law;
• admission arrangements were properly applied to the case; and
• admission of another child would prejudice the education of others.
13. 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. This means it can say a school is full but decide a child’s case is so compelling that it is more important to admit that child than prevent the effects to a school by having one more child.
14. We cannot question the decision if it has been properly taken. If the Panel has been properly informed, and used the correct procedure, then it is entitled to come to its own judgment about the evidence it hears.
15. The appeal panel’s detailed decision letter records the reasons Mr X presented to the appeal panel for wanting a place. He had the chance to verbally and in writing in advance set out his case. He had the chance to question School Y’s case. He has provided no evidence throughout of the house move. The Council’s school admissions policy says evidence has to be provided.
16. It is unlikely we would find fault in the Appeal Panel’s decision based on the information I have seen which supports the appeal panel’s decision.
17. We can achieve no more significant a remedy than the place already offered and accepted.

Back to top

Final decision

18. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault.
     

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman