Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault for us to question the panel’s decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for his son (Y).

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 9 place at his preferred school (School Z). This is a selective school and so Y sat the entrance exam. Y scored 114 but the school requires students to score 115. It did not therefore offer Y a place and Mr X appealed the decision.
6. Mr X’s appeal was considered based on written submissions. Mr X sent information in support of his appeal. This included information from Y’s current school and information about how Y performed in the entrance exam in previous years. Mr X also explained Y had suffered from COVID-19 shortly before the entrance exam.
7. The independent appeal panel took the view there was insufficient evidence to show that Y met the necessary academic standard. The panel’s decision letter also referred to Year 9 being full. Mr X says this is wrong as the school’s Published Admission Number is 240, but there are only 229 children in Year 9. Mr X raised this with the Council, and it said this was an oversight. It said the panel had refused Mr X’s appeal because of concerns about Y’s academic ability. It corrected its decision letter.
8. In appeals for selective schools the first issue the panel needs to decide is whether the appellant’s child meets the necessary academic standard. If they decide this is not the case, then the panel cannot uphold the appeal.
9. If the child meets the academic standard and the panel decides the school can offer a place without it causing ‘prejudice’ to the school, then they must offer a place.
10. If the child meets the academic standard and the panel decides the school cannot offer a place without it causing ‘prejudice’ to the school, they need to balance the appellant’s case against the prejudice to the school.
11. In this case the notes from the appeal and the decision letter show the panel decided there was not enough evidence which showed Y to be of the required academic ability. The evidence I have seen shows this is the reason the panel refused the appeal. This was a decision the panel was entitled to reach. The decision letter did wrongly refer to the school being full, which has now been corrected. On balance, there is not enough evidence of fault in the panel’s decision making to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault for us to question the panel’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman