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

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mrs C, complains that the IAP did not consider her case properly, and placed too much focus on the offered school rather than the reasons for wanting the preferred school.

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 Mrs C and the Council. I have also sent Mrs C a draft decision for her comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mrs C applied for a place for her daughter at her preferred school, School A for September 2020. The application was refused, and Mrs C appealed against the refusal. The appeal was also refused.
6. Mrs C has now complained to the Ombudsman, as she feels that the IAP focussed too much in its questioning on her reasons for rejecting the school that her daughter was offered, School B, rather than on her positive reasons for wanting School A.
7. I have looked carefully at the information provided, including the clerk’s notes of the hearing and the appeal refusal letter. They show that Mrs C made a case for School A, explaining that her son had attended it and her daughter wanted to follow him. She also said that her daughter’s friends were going to School A, and that the School provides music tuition, which School B does not.
8. The IAP asked questions about the case, but I have seen no undue focus on School B. Its role is to establish what Mrs C believes School A can offer that other schools, including School B, cannot, and why the Council believes that it is reasonable to offer other schools, including School B, rather than School A.
9. The Ombudsman cannot question the merits of a decision that has been properly taken. In this case the notes show that the IAP considered the information available, and balanced the respective prejudice cases. I have seen no evidence of fault in how it made the decision, so I will not investigate the complaint.

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.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman