Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that the Council was at fault in refusing her appeal for a school place for her daughter. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mrs B, complains that the Council was at fault in refusing her appeal for a school place for her daughter.

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 an independent 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
5. The complainant has had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs B made an in-year application for a Year 10 school place for her daughter. The schools to which she applied had no Year 10 vacancies, so the Council refused the application. It allocated Mrs B’s daughter a place at the nearest school with a vacancy.
7. Mrs B and her husband appealed for a place at one of the schools. They set out why they wanted their daughter to attend the school and provided evidence to support their appeal.
8. Mrs B’s husband attended the appeal hearing, which was held online. The appeal panel refused the appeal. Mrs B disagrees with the decision and wants the matter reconsidered. She also questions why her daughter’s position on the school’s waiting list has changed.
9. School admission appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. The panel must consider whether:

• the admission arrangements comply with the law;
• the admission arrangements were properly applied to the case.

10. The panel must then consider whether admitting another child would prejudice the education of others. 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.
11. The Ombudsman does not question the merits of decisions properly taken. The panel is entitled to come to its own judgment about the evidence it hears.
12. The clerk’s notes of the appeal hearing show that Mrs B’s husband had the opportunity to participate fully and make his case. They also show that the panel considered it. There is nothing to suggest fault in the way the panel considered the evidence and made its decision. The notes also show that the Council’s officer properly explained the circumstances in which an applicant can move down the waiting list.
13. The decision the panel members took was a matter for their judgement. Without evidence of fault, the Ombudsman cannot criticise it, or intervene to substitute an alternative view. There are therefore no grounds for us to investigate the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman