Summary: Mr X complains the information presented by the Council at his school admission appeal panel related to the wrong address. There was a problem with the information the Council presented at the appeal, but this did not call the Panel’s decision into question. We have found no fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the information presented by the Council at his school admission appeal panel related to the wrong address. He says as a result, the panel’s consideration was rushed and the decision flawed.

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)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. As part of my investigation I have considered:
• Mr X’s complaint and the information he provided;
• The Council’s response to my enquiries;
• all the information presented to the appeal panel, the notes taken by the clerk during the appeal, and the Panel’s decision letter following the appeal; and
• the School Admissions Appeals Code 2012.
5. Mr X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. No comments were received.

Back to top

What I found

Background and legislative framework

6. In accordance with Section 13 of the Education Act 1996, all local authorities must ensure that primary and secondary education is available to meet the needs of the population in their area.
7. The school admissions appeal panel (the Panel) sits as an independent admission panel for the benefit of children, parents, schools, and academies. It performs a judicial function and must be independent, impartial and transparent in their decision-making at all times. Panel members must not have a vested interest in the outcome of any stages of the appeal or be involved in an earlier stage of the proceedings, for example the decision to refuse admission.
8. The Published Admission Number (PAN) is the maximum number of pupils that the admission authority will admit to each year group.
9. School admission appeals by the Panel are governed by School Admissions Appeal Code (the Code). The Code is statutory guidance and must be followed. When considering an appeal which is not subject to infant class size legislation, the Panel must consider the following:

First stage: examining the decision to refuse admission

10. In the first stage of the decision-making process, the Panel must have consideration as to whether:

• admission arrangements comply with the School Admissions Code and all other admissions law
• admission arrangements were correctly and impartially applied
• admission of additional children would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources

Second stage: balancing the arguments

11. At this stage, the Panel must balance the arguments put forward by both the admission authority and the appellant. It must take into account the appellant’s reasons for wanting their child to attend the school in question, including what it can offer that other schools cannot.
12. If the Panel considers that the appellant’s case outweighs the prejudice to the school, it must uphold the appeal. When making decisions, the panel should:

• consider each point raised by the parties
• communicate to the clerk how each point was considered
• ensure the reasons for the final decision are explicit
• reach a decision by a simple majority of votes cast (where the votes are equally divided the chair has a second or casting vote)
• either uphold or dismiss an appeal without it being subject to any specified conditions.

After the appeal hearing

13. After the appeal hearing, the clerk should tell the parties of the Panel’s decision. The decision letter must contain a summary of relevant factors that each party raised and the Panel’s considerations. It must also give clear reasons for the Panel’s decision, including how the Panel decided on any points raised by the parties during the hearing.
14. The clerk or chair must sign the decision letter and send a copy to all parties within 5 school days, wherever possible. The clerk should inform all parties if they expect a delay in sending out the decision letter.

The Council’s policy

15. The Council says each child can have one registered address only for the purposes of determining priority for admission and transport entitlement. This address should be the place where the child is normally resident at the point of application or evidence of the address from which a child will attend school.
16. The policy states that exceptional circumstances in relation to the provision of a home address will be considered on a case-by-case basis. If there is shared residence of the child or a query is raised regarding the validity of an address, the Council will consider the home address to be with the parent with primary day to day care and control of the child. Residency of a child may also be clarified through a child arrangement order where it is shown who has care of the child. Evidence may be requested to show where the child resides.

What happened

17. Child Z’s mother applied for her daughter (Child Z) to attend secondary school (School A). The application was made under her home address. Child Z was refused a place at School A.
18. Mr X submitted an appeal for his daughter to attend School A. The appeal was made under his home address. Mr X said he had shared custody of Child Z and worked irregular shift patterns. He said the School was located halfway between both parents’ homes and transport was available.
19. The notes of the clerk show the Panel had regards to whether the admission arrangements complied with the law and Code and whether they had been properly applied in this case. The Panel resolved that they had.
20. Second, the Panel considered the representations made by the School not to admit Child Z. The Panel noted the School’s concerns that it is oversubscribed and above the PAN. It also noted that to exceed more than 310 pupils in a year group would require more teachers and more rooms and would exacerbate health and safety risks. On that basis, the Panel accepted the School’s point that to admit any more children would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.
21. Finally, the Panel moved to consider whether the circumstances and needs of Child Z and Mr X’s family outweighed the prejudice to School A. The notes of the clerk demonstrate that the Panel considered this issue. Primarily, Mr X raised that he had shared custody of Child Z and worked shifts. Mr X told the Panel about difficulties with transport to the allocated school. He said School A was halfway between Child Z’s mother’s home and his home and school transport was available from his home. The Panel noted that Mr X had not provided any evidence of the custody arrangements. It also said that a seat on transport to School A could not be guaranteed.
22. The clerk issued Mr X the decision letter following the appeal hearing. The decision was not to admit Child Z on the grounds it had reached its capacity and faced considerable pressures, as well as challenges supporting children with special educational needs. The clerk noted the points Mr X raised during the hearing which included:

• family circumstances, including childcare and domestic arrangements;
• concerns about Child Z attending an alternative school; and
• difficulties and concerns with transport provision to the allocated school from his home address.

23. The clerk said the Panel’s view was Mr X’s case did not outweigh the prejudice to School A should it allow admission.

Analysis

24. By law, I cannot question the merits of the Panel’s decision to refuse admission to Child Z if it followed the Code without fault. I must therefore have regard to whether Mr X’s appeal for School A was conducted procedurally correctly.
25. In my view, the Panel properly had regard to the Code. It correctly had regard to the School’s admission arrangements and the pressures it faced.
26. The Panel then weighed this against Mr X’s reasons for appeal, specifically the family’s childcare arrangements and difficulties with transport provision to the allocated from his home address. In conclusion, the Panel decided Mr X’s family circumstances did not outweigh the prejudice to the School should it admit Child Z. I have not determined any fault and so I have no authority to question the decision made.
27. I note that Mr X is of the view that because the information presented by the Council at his school admission appeal panel related to the wrong address, the panel’s consideration was rushed and the decision flawed. However, I found Mr X’s appeal was assessed on its individual merits. The notes of the clerk show the Panel was aware of Mr X’s address, checked the location during the hearing and demonstrated that transport from Mr X’s address was properly considered. The Panel noted that Mr X had not provided any evidence of the custody arrangements. It also said that a seat on transport to School A could not be guaranteed. Furthermore, I note the Panel asked Mr X questions about his family circumstances and current transport arrangements. Mr X had the opportunity to present his case to the Panel and there is no evidence the hearing was rushed.

Back to top

Final decision

28. The Panel was not at fault because it followed the Code and considered Mr X’s appeal on its individual merits and with due regard to the points he raised. For that reason, I cannot by law question the merits of the Panel’s decision to refuse admission to Child Z. I have completed my investigation on this basis.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman