Summary: Mrs X complained about the decision of an Independent Appeal Panel to refuse her son a place at her chosen school. There was no fault in the way this decision was made.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, says a school admissions appeal panel (the Appeal Panel) failed to consider her case properly and her son should have been given a place at her preferred school.

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 must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a school admission appeal 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3))
4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed 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. As part of my investigation I have:

• considered the complaint and information provided by Mrs X;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered its response;
• considered the relevant law and the relevant statutory guidance, which is the School Admission Appeals Code (2012); and
• sent my draft decision to both parties and invited comments on it. Any comments received were taken into consideration.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

6. Mrs X’s son (Child B), was due to start secondary school in September 2021. In Autumn 2020, Mrs X submitted her application to the Council, naming School P as her preferred choice.
7. School P was oversubscribed and Child B was not offered a place because other children had greater priority under its published admissions criteria. Child B was offered a place at another school that was further away from home.
8. Mrs X appealed this decision. She stated Child B had a medical condition that meant he would find the longer journey more difficult without the support of his friends who had been awarded places at School P.
9. The Appeal Panel heard the appeal in May 2021. It was held online due to Covid-19 and Mrs X attended via Zoom.
10. Her appeal was unsuccessful and so Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman. She says she was only given five minutes to present her case and disregarded her concerns about Child B’s safety while travelling a longer distance without support from his friends.

Analysis

11. School P is a Community School. The Council is the Admission Authority and is responsible for organising the independent appeal.
12. The School Admission Appeals Code 2012 issued by the Department for Education sets out the process the Appeal Panel must follow when considering an appeal.
13. The Appeal Panel must first consider whether the school has correctly applied the admission criteria to the application.
14. The Appeal Panel was satisfied the admission criteria were correctly applied. There is no fault in the Appeal Panel’s decision.
15. The Appeal Panel must consider whether the school can accept any more pupils without disadvantaging those already given places. This is known as the case for prejudice. The school submitted a detailed written case to explain why it could not accept more pupils.
16. The Appeal Panel decided the school was full and could not admit any more pupils. There is no fault in the Appeal Panel’s decision.
17. The Appeal Panel then went onto consider Mrs X’s case for her son to be admitted to the school. This is known as the balancing stage where the prejudice to Mrs X’s son if he is not given a place is balanced against the prejudice to the school if he is.
18. The notes made by the clerk to the Appeal Panel and the appeal papers record Mrs X’s case and her discussions with the Appeal Panel at the hearing. After hearing from Mrs X, the Appeal Panel decided the prejudice to Child B did not outweigh the prejudice to the school. The letter from the clerk explained the reasons why her appeal was unsuccessful.
19. Mrs X says she only had five minutes to present her case. It is not for the Appeal Panel to extract the strongest case from the parent. It is the parent’s responsibility to explain their case. I am satisfied Mrs X was given opportunity by the Appeal Panel to do so. It is also for the Appeal Panel to decide what weight should be given to individual circumstances.
20. Because I can see the Panel considered the facts presented by Mrs X, I do not agree that the Panel did not properly consider Child B’s circumstances. The Ombudsman is unable to interfere with the decision as long as it was properly made. I am satisfied it was. There is no fault in the Appeal Panel’s decision.

Back to top

Final decision

21. There was no fault in the Appeal Panel’s decision not to admit Mrs X’s son to the school. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions taken without fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman