Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel, and so we cannot question the merits of its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complained about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place for his 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.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X applied for a year 7 place at his preferred school (School B) for his daughter (Y). Because there were more applications than places available, the Council used School B’s oversubscription criteria to decide which children would be offered places. The Council did not offer Y a place at School B. In line with its published arrangements, the Council offered Y a place at an alternative school. Mr X was not happy with the place offered and asked for a place at Y’s catchment school (School C). Because there were no places the Council did not offer Y a place. Mr X appealed the decision.
6. In his written appeal Mr X referred to the difficulties it would cause if Y was not offered a place at School C. Mr X explained the school offered was too far away and there would be problems with transport. Mr X explained he worked, and his wife was a full-time student. Mr X sent extra information in support of his appeal shortly before the hearing.
7. Independent appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. They need to consider if the school’s admission arrangements comply with the law, and if they were properly applied to the appellant’s application. They need to decide if admitting a further child would “prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources”. If they think it would, they need to consider if an appellant’s arguments outweigh the prejudice to the school.
8. The clerk’s notes from the appeal show the school’s representative explained why it had not offered Y a place. The notes show what problems the school thought would be caused if it offered a place. In his appeal, Mr X explained why he wanted Y to attend School C.
9. The appeal papers and clerk’s notes show that:
• The extra information Mr X sent had been made available to the panel and presenting officer.
• The Council and Mr X and his representative were given the opportunity to present their case.
• The panel decided the school’s admission arrangements complied with the law and had been properly applied to Mr X’s application.
• The panel decided admitting further children would cause prejudice.
• The panel decided the evidence put forward by Mr X was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting a further child would cause the school.
10. The clerk’s letter to Mr X explained the panel’s decision. It is in line with the clerk’s notes.
11. We are not an appeal body and we cannot criticise decisions taken without fault. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider Mr X’s appeal.
12. Mr X told me he was not given the opportunity to properly present his case. But the clerk’s notes do not support this. The notes detail the case put forward by Mr X. These reflect the original appeal submission and the extra information he sent.
13. The clerk’s notes show the panel considered all the information provided by Mr X and the school. It was for the panel to decide what weight should be given to each piece of evidence. The decision to refuse Mr X’s appeal is one the panel was entitled to take.
14. I understand Mr X is disappointed with the panel’s decision. But without evidence of fault in the decision-making process, there are no grounds for us to become involved.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the panel considered Mr X’s appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman