Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her 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 School.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Mrs X’s son (Y) is due to start secondary school in September 2023.
6. Mrs X says that during the application process she could not access her account and there was a delay in issuing her with a new password. Mrs X set up a second account, but made a mistake, which meant her application for a place at Lytchett Minster (‘the School’) was late.
7. Because Mrs X’s application was late, it was considered after on time applications. The School did not offer Y a place and Mrs X appealed this decision.
8. In her written appeal Mrs X referred to the problems with her application and the difficulties it would cause if the School did not offer Y a place.

The appeals process

9. 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.

Mrs X’s appeal

10. Mrs X did not attend the appeal hearing. The panel therefore considered her appeal based on the information she had submitted.
11. The clerk’s notes show the School’s representative presented their case. The panel could ask questions. The panel considered Mrs X’s written appeal.
12. The panel decided the School’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel decided there were no technical reasons which meant Mrs X could not have applied on time. The panel decided admitting a further child would cause prejudice. The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Mrs X’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting Y would cause the School. The panel refused Mrs X’s appeal. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.

Assessment

13. I understand Mrs X is unhappy her appeal was unsuccessful. But we are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions when the proper process was followed and decisions were properly taken.
14. Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider Mrs X’s appeal.
15. The panel considered all the information before it and reached a decision it was entitled to. I have not seen enough evidence the panel did not properly consider the appeal to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about an unsuccessful school admission appeal because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman