Summary: A parent complained about the way the school admission appeal panel dealt with her appeal for a place for her son at her preferred primary school. But we will not start an investigation in this case as the Council has now agreed to hold a fresh appeal.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Miss B, complained about the school admission appeal panel which considered her appeal concerning the refusal of a place for her son (‘C’) at her preferred primary school (‘the School’). In particular Miss B said that in rejecting her appeal the panel did not take enough account of her family’s difficult personal circumstances and her inability to get C to and from the alternative school he was offered.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if, for example, we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information Miss B provided about her complaint. I also took account of documents about her appeal, which were provided by the Council.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Having examined the records from Miss B’s appeal I consider there were several signs of fault in the way the panel dealt with her case.
5. First, I consider there is some evidence to support Miss B’s view that the panel did not take proper account of her appeal case. In particular, at the hearing Miss B referred to the difficult circumstances which led her to relocate her family and find new schools for her children, and the challenges they were facing as a result. However in its decision-making the panel appeared to focus mainly on one issue regarding how C could access the offered school.
6. It also seems in deciding the appeal the panel made an assumption that suitable help with school transport to and from the offered school would be available for C, without establishing if that was, in fact, the case.
7. In addition, a key part of a panel’s role is to consider if admitting another child would prejudice the education of other children at the school. If a panel decides there would be prejudice it must then balance this against the appellant’s arguments for an extra admission. If a panel decides the appellant’s case outweighs the prejudice to the school, it must uphold the appeal and allow the child a place.
8. The panel for Miss B’s appeal decided there would be prejudice to the School if C was given a place and that this outweighed her case for his admission. But from the appeal records it is hard to see the panel’s rationale for reaching that view, particularly as the School’s case seemed quite brief and short on detail.
9. A further doubt concerns the adequacy of the panel’s decision letter. The statutory School Admission Appeals Code says decision letters “must contain a summary of relevant factors that were raised by the parties and considered by the panel” and “must also give clear reasons for the panel’s decision.” But I am not convinced the limited information provided in the decision letter in this case was sufficient to meet those requirements.
10. In the circumstances I considered there were grounds for us to carry out a formal investigation in Miss B’s case and the likelihood we would find that fault had impaired the panel’s decision.
11. But to avoid the time and trouble involved in a formal investigation process I asked the Council to consider agreeing to hold a fresh appeal in order to remedy Miss B’s complaint at an early stage. To its credit the Council promptly agreed to arrange a new appeal. I consider that this is a suitable way of addressing Miss B’s complaint. Therefore we have no reason to pursue her case any further.

Final decision

12. We do not have reason to investigate Miss B’s complaint that the school admission appeal panel unfairly decided her appeal regarding a place for her son at her preferred primary school. This is because the Council has now taken satisfactory action to deal with this matter by agreeing to hold a fresh appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman