Summary: We will not investigate Mrs 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 Mrs X, complains about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place.

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 Mrs X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and information from the Council. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs X has recently moved address. She applied for a Year 5 place at School Z for her daughter (Y). School Z has a Published Admission Number of 30 and there were already 30 children in Year 5. The Council therefore refused Mrs X’s application and she appealed the decision not to offer Y a place.
5. 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.
6. The clerk’s notes from the appeal show the school’s representative explained why it had not offered Y a place at School Z. The notes show what difficulties the school thought would be caused if it offered Y a place. Y’s father (Mr X) attended the appeal and explained why he and Mrs X wanted Y to attend School Z. He explained the school was close to home and Mrs X had attended the school as a child. Mr and Mrs X wanted Y to be able to walk to school.
7. The clerk’s notes also show that:
• Mr X and the panel could ask questions about the information presented.
• The panel decided the school’s admission arrangements complied with the law and had been properly applied to the application.
• The panel decided admitting further children would cause prejudice.
• The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Mr and Mrs X’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting a further child would cause the school.
8. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.
9. I understand Mrs X is disappointed with the panel’s decision. Mrs X is also unhappy the same panel considered an appeal for a place at a different school. But there is nothing in law which prevents this – although the panel needs to consider each case on its merits.
10. 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 the appeal. The panel considered the information provided by Y’s parents and the Council. It is for the panel to decide what weight should be given to each piece of evidence. The decision to refuse the appeal is one the panel was entitled to take.
11. Without evidence of fault in the decision-making process there are no grounds for us to become involved. That is the case here and so we will not start an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman