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 him 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. 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’s child, Z, used to attend School Y. They moved away for two years then returned. In advance of returning, they applied, in November 2019, for a place in Year 3 to start in January 2020. School Y was full. In January 2020, the Council offered a place at School D. They accepted this and Z started attending. Mr X says Z did not like it and began getting bullied. In March 2020, he appealed for a place at School Y.
7. In their appeal Mr X explained the history. They said the bullying was dangerous for Z as they suffered from a heart condition. They attached medical letters in support.
8. An independent appeal panel considered his appeal in July 2020 by writing. In advance Mr X had been provided with the School’s case. It said School D knew nothing of the bullying claims. Mr X had the opportunity to ask written questions of the School D’s case and to provide comments on the School’s case. He did so. He did not comment on the claim School D knew nothing of the bullying.
9. The independent appeal panel decided not to award Z 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 they were not given a chance to explain their appeal and they did not have a chance to answer back to the appeal panel’s decision.

Analysis

The appeal panel’s and our role

11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. The appeal panel’s detailed decision letter records the reasons Mr X presented to the appeal panel for wanting a place.
15. Mr X had the chance to in writing set out their case. And he had the chance to question School Y’s case. He has not said what else he wanted to say and why he was unable to do so.
16. The school’s appeal process does not allow for people to answer back to the appeal panel about their decision. They consider the information, and make their decision in private. Its then communicated to the parents. This is what happened here.
17. 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, which could have led to the injustice Mr X claims of losing out of a school place.

Back to top

Final decision

18. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault which caused him the alleged injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman