Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that the School’s Admissions Appeal Panel failed to provide her child with a place at this school. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault which caused her to lose out on a school place.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Miss X, says the School’s Admissions Appeal Panel did not properly consider her appeal for a place for her 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 Miss X provided with her complaint. The School provided me with the notes from the Appeal Panel hearing, the documents the Appeal Panel had and its decision letter. Miss X had an opportunity to comment on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

6. Miss X applied on time for her child, Z, to have a place at this School from September 2020.
7. There were more applicants than places. The School applied the published admissions scheme to decide who should get the places. The last place went to a child in a higher admission’s criteria than Miss X. The Council offered Z a place at School D, which is less than a mile and half from their home.
8. Miss X appealed for a place at this School. She said:
• She thinks it is the best school;
• It is the most convenient school for grandparents to provide wrap around care;
• Z has a health issue which is being considered by the hospital.
9. Between appealing and the appeal being held, Miss X provided extra information on the health issues which the Appeal Panel had.
10. An independent appeal panel considered her appeal in July 2020 by writing. Miss X had clearly had the school’s case that it was full in advance and had a chance to submit questions. Also the Appeal Panel had asked Miss X nine written questions. The school told the Appeal Panel that another school, K, which is equally as convenient as this one for the grandparents, had places. Miss X said School K was further from her home and not as good a school.
11. The Appeal Panel decided not to award her a place. Miss X disagreed and complained to the Ombudsman.
12. Miss X says the Appeal Panel did not properly consider her case. She says she should have been awarded medical priority.

Analysis

The appeal panel’s and our role

13. 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.
14. 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.
15. 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.
16. The School’s admission criteria gives preference to applicants with medical priority. But this is its fourth criteria and the last place in this school went to an applicant in the third criteria. Having medical priority would not have given Miss X a place.
17. The appeal panel’s detailed decision letter records the reasons Miss X gave the appeal panel for wanting a place. She had the chance to set out her case in writing. The appeal panel asked her written questions before they decided the case and she answered them. She had the chance to question the School’s case.
18. 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.

Back to top

Final decision

19. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault which has caused Miss X to lose out on a place.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman