Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel failed to provide her child with a place at School Z. 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 Mrs X, says the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel did not properly consider her appeal for a place for her child, B.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Mrs X provided with her complaint. The Council provided me with the notes from the Appeal Panel hearing, the documents the Appeal Panel had and its decision letter. I considered Mrs X’s comments on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

5. Mrs X applied in November 2020 for her child, B, to have a place at School Z in Year Five. They had recently moved into the area. School Z is the nearest school to their home.
6. Year Five already had pupils up to the published admission number. Mrs X’s application was rejected and she appealed. She said:
• This is her nearest school;
• The allocated school, School Y, was too far from her home and the journey to it was too dangerous for B to walk on their own.
7. The Council allocated B a place at School Y which is around one mile’s walking distance from their home.
8. An independent appeal panel considered her appeal in January 2021, which Mrs X attended. The appeal panel decided not to award her a place. Mrs X disagreed and complained to the Ombudsman.
9. Mr X says the Appeal Panel did not give enough attention or weight to the health and safety of her child having to walk to the allocated school. She says it is too far for B, will tire B out and is not a safe route for them to walk on their own.

Analysis

10. The School has to by law have a way of deciding who should get a place when more people apply for a place than the School had space for. This means it is not legally or practically possible for every parent to get the place they want for their children.

The appeal panel’s and our role

11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. The appeal panel’s decision letter records the reasons Mrs X gave the appeal panel for wanting a place. It decided the school was full. It decided the prejudice to B by not getting a place at this school did not out weigh that to the school by admitting one more pupil.
15. The law says it is reasonable to expect a ten year old child to walk up to three miles to school, accompanied where necessary. If the parent does not think the child can walk the route safely on their own, it is the parents’ responsibility to make sure there is a way the child can get to school. This can include asking the Council’s home to school transport team to provide transport. It is not fault of the Appeal Panel to concentrate on the health and safety of the children in the school.
16. 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

17. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman