Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the appeal panel and so we cannot question the merits of its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, complains that the school admission appeals panel was at fault in refusing her appeal for a school place for her daughter.

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 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether an independent school admission appeals panel’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered what Miss X has said in support of her complaint and the appeal documents provided by the Council. Miss X had opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Miss X applied for a place in reception for her son (Y) at her preferred school (School Z). School Z is a foundation school and so the governing body is the admissions authority. Because there were more applications than spaces available, the school used its oversubscription criteria to decide which children would be offered a place. Y was not offered a place at School Z as the places were offered to children with a higher priority under the School’s admissions policy.
6. In line with its published admissions scheme, the Council offered Y a place at the closest school with spaces – this is the catchment school for Miss X’s home address. Miss X appealed the decision not to offer Y a place at School Z.
7. Independent school admission appeal 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, where admitting another child would mean there would be more than 30 pupils per teacher. 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.

8. What is ‘unreasonable’ is a high test. The panel needs to be sure the decision to refuse a place was “perverse” or “outrageous”. For that reason, panels rarely find an admission authority’s decision to be unreasonable. Miss X’s appeal for a place was governed by infant class size legislation.
9. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body and we cannot question decisions taken without fault. Appeal panels must consider the information they are presented with – but it is for the panel to decide what weight it will give to the evidence it hears.
10. At the first stage of the appeal the panel considered School Z’s case that admitting another child would breach the infant class size rule. The panel considered this stage based on written representations. All the appellants, including Miss X, had been offered the chance to send written questions about School Z’s case. All the questions and answers were then circulated to all parties before the hearing.
11. The appeal clerk’s notes from the hearing show that the panel considered all the information provided about School Z’s case before reaching a decision that the infant class size rules would be breached if an extra child was given a place.
12. The appeal panel then considered Miss X’s individual appeal, which she attended via video link. During the hearing, Miss X explained why she wanted Y to attend School Z, and the problems it would cause if Y had to attend a different school. School Z’s representative explained the admissions process and why it had not offered Y a place. There was an opportunity during the hearing for the panel, the representative and Miss X to ask questions.
13. The clerk’s notes show the panel considered the points set out in paragraph 7. It decided School Z’s admission arrangements had been properly determined and applied. It decided it was not an unreasonable decision to refuse admission. The panel found that none of the grounds for allowing an infant class size appeal had been met. This is a decision the panel was entitled to reach. The clerk’s letter to Miss X explained the panel’s decision.
14. I understand Miss X is unhappy her appeal was unsuccessful. But each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. There is no evidence of fault in how the panel decided Miss X’s appeal. Without evidence of fault, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision the panel made, or intervene to substitute an alternative view. An investigation is not therefore appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the appeal panel and so we cannot question the merits of its decision.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman