Summary: Mrs B says an appeal panel considering her son’s school admissions appeal failed to give her sufficient opportunity to put her case and failed to consider the evidence she provided. There is no evidence of fault in how the appeal panel handled the case.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs B, complained the appeal panel considering her school admissions appeal:
• failed to give her sufficient opportunity to put her case due to technical difficulties;
• failed to consider the evidence she submitted in support of her son’s appeal.
2. Mrs B says as a result she feels her son was not given a fair hearing which has caused her and her family significant upset.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and Mrs B's comments;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
6. Mrs B and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

7. The school admissions appeals code (the appeals code) says admission authorities may make arrangements for appeal hearings to be held in person or remotely by video conference or a mixture of the two. Appeal hearings held entirely by telephone are permitted only where video conferencing cannot be used for reasons relating to connectivity or accessibility and if the appellant and presenting officer both agree. Regardless of the forum chosen, appeal panels must allow appellants the opportunity to make oral representations.
8. The appeals code says designated grammar schools are permitted to select children for admission on the basis of academic ability and may leave places unfilled if there are insufficient eligible applicants. Some admission authorities for grammar schools offer places to those who score highest, others set a pass mark and then apply oversubscription criteria to those applicants that reach the required standard.
9. The appeals code says an appeal panel may be asked to consider an appeal where the appellant believes the child did not perform at their best on the day of the entrance test. In such cases:
• a) where a local review process has not been applied, the panel must only uphold the appeal if it is satisfied:
• i) there is evidence to demonstrate the child is of the required academic standards, for example, school reports giving Year 5/Year 6 SAT results or a letter of support from their current or previous school clearly indicating why the child is considered to be of grammar school ability; and
• ii) where applicable, that the appellant’s arguments outweigh the admission authority’s case that admission of additional children would cause prejudice.
• b) where a local review process has been followed, the panel must only consider whether each child’s review was carried out in a fair, consistent and objective way and if there is no evidence that this has been done, the panel must follow the process in (a) above.
10. The Council’s fact sheet (fact sheet) for grammar school appeals says the appeal will be conducted in a virtual setting.
11. The fact sheet says if the child did not meet the standard in the Kent test/entrance test the panel will firstly consider whether there is sufficient evidence the child is of grammar school ability. It says the individual appeal should last approximately 25 minutes.
12. The fact sheet says during the decision-making part of the meeting if the child was not offered a place at the school due to the Kent test/school’s own entrance test the panel members must consider the child’s academic attainment. If they do not find the adequate academic evidence the appeal is not successful and the panel are not required to move to the second stage. The second stage is where the panel weighs up the case for admitting the child against the school’s arguments for not being able to admit another child.
13. The selection procedure in Kent automatically selects pupils for grammar school with an aggregated score of 332 or more with no single score lower than 108.

What happened

14. Mrs B applied for a place for her son at grammar school. Mrs B’s son had taken the Kent test and scored 333 overall but only scored 107 in mathematics. As a result Mrs B’s son did not automatically qualify for a grammar school place. Mrs B put in an appeal for the grammar school.
15. On the day of the appeal panel hearing, which was due to take place by video conference, Mrs B had technical difficulties. That meant Mrs B could not access the video conference link and 15 minutes into her allotted time the clerk telephoned her and she took part in the appeal hearing by telephone. Mrs B’s husband and school governor supporting them both took part by video conference. All other parties had no issues accessing the video conference. The appeal panel considered the case and decided Mrs B’s son did not meet the criteria for a grammar school placement.

Analysis

16. Mrs B says the appeal panel failed to give her sufficient opportunity to put her case due to technical difficulties and failed to consider the information and evidence she provided.
17. In terms of the way the appeal was handled, I note Mrs B had difficulties connecting to the video conference. I am satisfied that meant Mrs B eventually had to attend by telephone, 15 minutes after the appeal meeting was due to start. Mrs B says she felt flustered during that meeting and unable to put forward her points of appeal. Mrs B also says she was only given 15 minutes to set out her appeal, which is less than the 25 minutes she should have received. Mrs B says as a result she could not put forward all the points she wanted to make. Mrs B is also concerned the notes from the appeal panel hearing do not refer to the technical difficulties.
18. Under the school admission’s appeal code it is not fault to carry out an appeal remotely. Nor is it fault for some of the attendees at the appeal to take part via video conference while other members take part via telephone. However, there is an expectation that when not everyone can attend an appeal hearing in the same way all agree the appeal should go ahead.
19. I understand Mrs B’s frustration given she wanted to attend the video conference and could not do so due to technical difficulties her end. However, I note although Mrs B attended the appeal hearing by telephone her husband was able to attend by video conference from his workplace and a school governor who was supporting the family was also able to attend by video conference. There is no evidence in the documentary records to suggest any participant in the appeal asked for an adjournment until everyone could attend by video conference. Mrs B also says she would have been reluctant to request an adjournment given the school governor had made time to attend the appeal hearing. Given there was no evidence anyone raised concerns about how the appeal would take place before it began I cannot criticise the Council for allowing the appeal to go ahead in the way it did.
20. I am sure Mrs B felt flustered during the appeal meeting given the difficulties trying to get onto the video conference. However, having read the written case for the appeal and the representations Mrs B, her husband and the school governor put forward during the appeal hearing I am satisfied all the points in support of the appeal were put to the panel. I therefore could not say Mrs B had not been able to put forward her points, in conjunction with her husband and the school governor, as a result of having to attend by telephone.
21. I am aware Mrs B is concerned the notes for the appeal panel hearing suggest it began on time and was completed 30 minutes later when that is not accurate. As the Council has pointed out though, all participants in the meeting were present at the appointed time, with the exception of Mrs B. I appreciate from Mrs B’s perspective the appeal only took 15 minutes as it did not start until she attended by telephone. However, there is no specific time period for an appeal to take place. There is no evidence from the notes from the appeal hearing to suggest any part of the appeal was missed out due to the technical difficulties Mrs B experienced.
22. While the information sent out before the appeal hearing refers to appeals taking 25 minutes this is referred to as an approximation and the Council makes clear appeals can take a shorter or longer period. I therefore do not consider the length of the appeal hearing here warrants a finding of fault. I say that particularly given I note during the appeal hearing the Chair checked with the appellants to make sure they were satisfied they had sufficient opportunity to make their points. There is no evidence in the notes from the appeal hearing to suggest Mrs B, her husband or the school governor said they believed they had not had enough time.
23. Mrs B says during the appeal hearing she was interrupted by the Chair who was rude. That is not an allegation I can reach a safe conclusion on given I have to rely on the documentary records.
24. Mrs B says now she has seen the decision from the appeal panel and the notes from the appeal panel hearing she is not satisfied the panel properly considered the points she made in support of her appeal. In particular, Mrs B says the panel did not take into account the fact her son is a high achiever and his performance in the exam was affected by the loss of his grandmother in 2022. Mrs B also says the panel failed to take into account the fact her son was only one mark short of qualifying for a place at the grammar school.
25. Having considered the notes from the appeal panel hearing I am satisfied all the evidence Mrs B put in was considered, which includes the letters of support she provided. In particular, the clerk’s notes refer to the impact the bereavement had on Mrs B’s son, his attendance at school and his performance in the exam. The notes also refer to the fact he was studying maths at greater depth in year five and that he was a high achiever. The decision-making part of the meeting also referred to the impact of the loss of a family member on her son’s progress, the support he had received which had returned him to his usual performance levels and that her son was only one mark short of achieving a grammar school place in the test. In those circumstances I could not say panel failed to take those matters into account. Clearly the panel has reached a view with which Mrs B strongly disagrees. However, as it has reached that view properly it is not a decision I could criticise.
26. Mrs B also says the clerk’s notes stated she did not provide letters from the school when that is not accurate. Mrs B is referring here to the section of the clerk’s notes where it is not recorded that additional evidence was submitted. I am satisfied though that section refers to additional evidence submitted after the final pack had been sent to parents, rather than to any additional evidence provided which had already been included in the pack. In this case I am satisfied the supporting letters Mrs B had provided were included in the final pack. Not recording that as additional evidence is therefore not fault. As I said earlier though, I am satisfied in reaching its decision the panel took into account all the information provided as it is referred to.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have completed my investigation and do not uphold the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman