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

5. Mrs X applied for her son (Y) to start Year 7 at Archbishop Beck (‘the School’). Because there were more applications than places available, the School used its oversubscription criteria to decide which children it would offer places. It did not offer Y a place and Mrs X appealed the decision.

The appeals process

6. 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

7. The clerk’s notes show the School’s representative presented their case. They explained how places had been offered and the problems it would cause if other children were admitted. The panel and parents could ask questions. Mrs X presented her case. In her appeal Mrs X explained Y attends a partner primary school. All of Y’s friends were going to the School and there were logistical issues with the alternative school the Council had offered Y.
8. The panel decided the School’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. 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

9. 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.
10. 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 and decide Mrs X’s appeal.
11. The panel considered all the information before it and reached a decision it was entitled to. The clerk’s notes show the key points discussed and how the panel reached its decision. These are reflected in the decision letter. There is enough detail for third parties to understand how the panel reached its decision. I have not seen enough evidence the panel did not properly consider the appeal to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman