Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the 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 School’s 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 School provided me with the notes from the Appeal Panel hearing, the documents the Appeal Panel had and its decision letter. Mr X had an opportunity to comment on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

6. Mr X applied for his child, Z, to have a place at this School from September 2020 in year nine. Mr X had applied for a place for Z for year seven but had been unsuccessful. Z had attended a fee paying school since. Mr X says they can no longer pay the fees.
7. Z’s sibling has now obtained a place for themselves in year seven starting in September 2020. Mr X therefore applied for a place for Z to attend too. Year nine is very over subscribed. It already had 72 more pupils in it than the published admission number. His application was refused and he appealed.
8. In his appeal Mr X said:
• He wanted his two siblings to attend the same school;
• He wanted Z to attend a faith school;
• The school the Council had allocated a place for Z at was not suitable. He did not explain why.
9. An independent appeal panel heard his appeal in June 2020 by video link. At that appeal Mr X explained additionally that he was anxious about his children being subjected to racism.
10. The appeal panel decided not to award Z a place. Mr X disagreed and complained to the Ombudsman.
11. Mr X says the appeal panel did not properly consider his case. He says the decision letter makes no reference to the racism aspect to his appeal. He says the appeal panel did not have a member whose skin was of colour.

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. 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.
16. We do not expect the appeal panel’s detailed decision letter to record exactly every reason Mr X presented to the appeal panel for wanting a place. It is illustrative of the decision and not the decision itself.
17. It is clear from the notes of the hearing that the racism issue was part of the case Mr X presented which the Appeal Panel considered before it reached its decision. The Clerk’s notes record the word, ‘racism’ in four separate places.

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