Summary: there was no fault in the way an Independent Appeal Panel made its decision not to admit Mr F’s son to a secondary school.  The Ombudsman cannot question decisions made without fault.

The complaint

1. Mr F complained about an Independent Appeal Panel’s decision not to admit his son to a secondary school. He disagrees with the Panel’s decision.

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 a school admission appeal panel’s decision simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider if there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3))
3. We check the Independent Appeal Panel followed the Code of Practice issued by the Department for Education and the hearing was fair.  We do this by examining the notes taken by the Clerk during the hearing.  We do not have the power to overturn the Panel’s decision, and we cannot give a child a place at the school. If we find fault, which calls the panel’s decision into question, we may ask for a new appeal hearing.
4. If we are satisfied with a panel’s actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered:

• information provided by Mr F;
• all the information submitted to the Appeal Panel, the notes taken by the Clerk during the appeal, and the Panel’s decision letter following the appeal; and
• the School Admissions Appeals Code 2012.

6. I invited Mr F and the Council to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr F applied for a place for his son to join the school in September 2020. His application was unsuccessful. He was offered a place at his second choice school instead. Mr F appealed the Council’s decision, but his appeal was unsuccessful. He asked for a second appeal in September 2020. The Council refused. Mr F then complained to the Ombudsman.
8. The school Mr F wants is a community school. The Council is the admission authority and responsible for organising the appeal.
9. The School Admission Appeals Code 2012 issued by the Department for Education sets out the process the Independent Appeal Panel must follow when considering an appeal.
10. The Panel must first consider whether the Council has correctly applied the admission criteria to the application. Mr F’s application was unsuccessful because there were more applications than places available, and all the places were allocated to pupils with higher priority.
11. Mr F’s application was in category 8: children whose home address is outside the catchment area. When there are more applications than places available, the Council gives priority to those living closest. Mr F lives 0.8 miles from the school. The last pupil admitted lives 0.5 miles from the school.
12. The Panel was satisfied the admission criteria were correctly applied to Mr F’s application.
13. The Panel must then consider whether the school can accept any more pupils without disadvantaging those already given places. This is known as the case for prejudice. The Panel heard the school had limited space available for some specialist subject teaching, and the low reading age of many pupils placed increased demands on teachers. The Panel accepted the school was full and could not take extra pupils. The Panel made its decision without fault, so there are no grounds for the Ombudsman to question it.
14. The Panel must then consider Mr F’s case for his son to be admitted to the school even though the school is full. This is known as the balancing stage where the prejudice to Mr F’s son if he is not given a place is balanced against the prejudice to the school if he is. The Clerk’s notes and the decision letter clearly record the reasons for Mr F’s appeal. The Panel considered Mr F’s arguments but decided the prejudice to his son did not outweigh the prejudice to the school. The Panel made its decision without fault, so there are no grounds for the Ombudsman to question it.

Back to top

Final decision

15. There is no fault in the Appeal Panel’s decision not to admit Mr F’s son to the school. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions taken without fault. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman