Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the refusal of admission to the complainant’s preferred school for her son. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way that the Independent Appeal Panel (IAP) made its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Ms Q, says that the IAP hearing her appeal against the refusal of admission to her preferred school for her son did not properly consider the case that she made for his admission.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’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)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by Ms Q and by the Council. I have also sent Ms Q a draft decision for her comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms Q applied for a place at her preferred school for her son for September 2020. The application was refused, and she appealed. The appeal was also refused, and Ms Q has now complained to the Ombudsman.
6. Ms Q’s appeal was based on her belief that the school allocated to her son was inappropriate for him to attend because of the journey to it. She felt the journey would take him through areas where there is a high incidence of crime, and that the Panel should consider the particular danger to young Black men in these circumstances.
7. Ms Q’s complaint to the Ombudsman is that the Panel did not properly consider these issues.
8. I have looked carefully at the clerk’s notes of the hearing. The notes are clear that the Panel did consider Ms Q’s case, but felt that the same issues could be raised in relation to her son’s journey to School A. Additionally the Panel noted that Ms Q did not apply for her nearest schools, which would involve a shorter journey.
9. The Ombudsman cannot consider the merits of a decision that has been properly made by the Panel. As the Panel considered and weighed the information before it, I judge the decision to have been properly made.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the IAP made its decision, so I cannot question the merits of it.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman