Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council’s school admission appeal panel failed to properly consider the complainant’s grounds of appeal against the decision to refuse his application for a school place. 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’s school admission appeal panel failed to properly consider his grounds of 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 has had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr B moved to the Council’s area and applied for a school place for his son in the Reception year group for September 2022 admission. As he had been unable to relocate before the closing date for applications, the places at his preferred school had already been allocated. The Council refused his application.
7. Mr B appealed against the decision. He attended the appeal hearing by telephone conference to make his case for his son’s admission to the school. He explained why he had been unable to apply earlier, and set out why he regarded the alternative schools available as being too far from his home.
8. The appeal panel refused the appeal. Mr B believes the panel failed to take proper account of his grounds of appeal. He wants the matter reconsidered.
9. School admission appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. The law says the size of an infant class must not be more than 30 pupils per teacher. There are only limited circumstances in which more than 30 children can be admitted. There are special rules governing appeals for Reception and Years 1 and 2. Appeals under these rules are known as “infant class size appeals”. The rules say the panel must consider whether:

• admitting another child would breach the class size limit;
• the admission arrangements comply with the law:
• the admission arrangements were properly applied to the case:
• the decision to refuse a place was one which a reasonable authority would have made in the circumstances.

10. What is ‘unreasonable’ is a high test. The panel needs to be sure that to refuse a place was “perverse” or “outrageous”. For that reason panels rarely find an admission authority’s decision to be unreasonable.
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 the appeal hearing show that Mr B was able to make his case and the panel considered it. There is no evidence of fault in the way it did so.
13. Without evidence of fault in the way the appeal panel made the decision to refuse the appeal, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision itself, or intervene to substitute an alternative view. There are therefore no grounds on which 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