Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council is at fault in refusing his appeal for a school place for his son. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr B, complains that the Council is at fault in refusing his appeal for a school place for his son.

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 had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr B applied for a school place for his son for transfer to secondary school in September 2022. The Council received more applications than the school had places available, so it applied its oversubscription policy. It refused Mr B's application.
7. Mr B appealed against the Council's decision. He made a written appeal and attended an online appeal hearing to make his case in person. In support of the appeal, Mr B explained why the school was suitable for his son and why he was not prepared to send him to the school his home authority had offered.
8. Having considered the arguments made by Mr B and the Council's representative, the school admission appeal panel decided to refuse the appeal. Mr B believes this decision is unreasonable. He says the Council’s representative was unable to answer relevant questions, and the panel failed to recognise that the school’s capacity is greater than the number of pupils on roll.
9. School admission appeals 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 Mr B's appeal hearing show that he was able to make his case and that the panel considered it. The evidence the school provided shows why it believed further admission to the school would prejudice the delivery of education and Mr B had the opportunity to question it. It is for the panel to decide how much weight to give to the evidence. There is no evidence of fault in the way the panel made its decision.
13. Without evidence of fault, we cannot criticise the decision the panel made, or intervene to substitute an alternative view. There are therefore no grounds to investigate the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman