Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel’s failure to provide their child with a place at School Y. This is because it is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X say the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel did not properly consider their appeal for a school place for their child. They said the Appeal Panel (the Panel), did not consider their child’s needs or consider their own disabilities.

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 a 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. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:
• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr and Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr and Mrs X have two children that attend different schools and, due to health issues they have, they experience difficulties in taking their children to and from school. Mr and Mrs X wanted their younger child to move to a school nearer to their older child to alleviate this but were unable to secure a place. Mr & Mrs X appealed against this decision to the Panel.

The appeals process

7. The Infant Class Sizes legislation provides there must not be more than 30 children in an infant class (that is, classes containing reception, year one and year two children).
8. The Government has listed the few circumstances in which a child may be classed as an ‘exception’ and the class sizes could go over 30.
9. When a parent is appealing for a place in an infant class, the Independent Appeal Panel’s task is to review the decision already made. Independent Appeal Panels can only uphold an appeal where Infant Class Sizes applies if the admissions arrangements were unlawful, or not properly applied, or if the decision not to admit was unreasonable. The test of unreasonableness here is very high as the panel needs to be sure that to refuse a place was “perverse” or “outrageous”.

Mr and Mrs X’s appeal

10. In their appeal submission Mr and Mrs X explained the difficulties they faced due to their disabilities, as well as a dispute they had with their younger child’s school. Finally, they explained the school they wanted for their younger child was a feeder school for the school their elder child attends. Mr and Mrs X considered it would be less disruptive for them if eventually their children attended the same school.
11. The Council’s case set out there were already 30 children in each of the three classes in Reception. To admit another child would breach the infant class size rules. In addition, there were several other schools within the area that had vacancies. They offered to support Mr and Mrs X with applications.
12. The panel also concluded that the school’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been correctly applied, as Mr and Mrs X’s case does not fall into one of the ‘exceptions’ to the infant class size rule.
13. In the notes of its decision making, the panel referenced Mr and Mrs X’s concerns about their child’s current school. They also recorded that they were unsure whether they could provide transport to any of the schools that had a vacancy. Both are less than a mile and half from their home. The panel decided unanimously the decision to refuse a place was not unreasonable.
14. The clerk to the appeal panel wrote to Mrs X setting out the panel’s decision.

Assessment

15. Although Mr and Mrs X are unhappy about the outcome of the appeal, we cannot question decisions which were properly taken. The Panel followed the proper process in considering the appeal. It considered all available information. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Panel decided Mr and Mrs X’s appeal to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

16. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman