Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s School Admissions Appeal Panel’s handling of her appeal against the refusal to offer her child a place at their preferred school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant further investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains about the Council’s independent school admissions appeals panel’s handling of her appeal for a Year 7 place for her child, Y, at her preferred school (School Z). She says the Council failed to notify her about a change to Y’s allocated school and says this impacted on her ability to have a fair hearing. She also complains the clerk made an error in their notes of the appeal hearing and in the decision letter confirming the decision to refuse her appeal.

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)
3. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

Background

6. Ms X applied for a place for Y in Year 7 at School Z from September 2023. School Z was Ms X’s first-choice for Y, in part because Ms X intends to move to its area later in the year.
7. The Council is not Ms X’s home authority. School Z is based within its area but Ms X’s home authority administered the application process and allocated Y a place at School 1. Ms X based her appeal for a place at School Z on the unsuitability of School 1 but before the appeal hearing her home authority allocated Y a place at School 2, which Ms X had listed as a higher preference in her application. Ms X says she was unaware of the change in allocated schools and only saw the letter from her home authority confirming this 10 minutes before joining the appeal hearing. Ms X provided numerous documents in support of her appeal but several of these focused on the reasons why Y should not attend School 1; they were therefore not relevant by the time of the appeal hearing as Y had been allocated a place at School 2 and the offer of a place at School 1 had lapsed. She therefore believes she did not have the opportunity to fully make her case for why her child should be admitted to School Z rather than attending School 2.

The appeals process

8. 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 and impartially applied to the appellant’s application. They also 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.
9. The clerk must ensure an accurate record is taken of the points raised at the hearing, including the proceedings, attendance, voting, and reasons for decisions.

Analysis

10. Our role is to check appeals have been carried out properly. We do not provide a further right of appeal or decide whether a child should be given a place at a school and we cannot question the merits of decisions properly taken. If the panel has been properly informed, and used the correct procedure, then it is entitled to come to its own judgment about the evidence it hears.
11. Although Ms X says she did not know Y had been allocated a place at School 2 until 10 minutes before the appeal hearing the evidence I have seen does not support this and even if it is true, the issue is not the result of any fault by the Council/panel.
12. The appeal hearing took place in early June 2023 and the Council shared all relevant information with Ms X on 25 May 2023. This included a copy of a letter from Ms X’s home authority dated 16 May 2023 which confirmed the place at School 1 had been withdrawn as Y had been offered a place at School 2, which Ms X had listed as a higher preference.
13. We could not say non-delivery of the home authority’s letter was the result of any fault by the Council and the Council shared this letter with Ms X as part of the document bundle more than one week before the hearing. It has also provided a screenshot to show the clerk tried to phone Ms X on the number she provided to us twice in the days before the hearing. It was Ms X’s responsibility to read the documents and we could not hold the Council responsible for the fact she did not notice the letter from her home authority.
14. In any event, the clerk’s notes showed the panel considered Ms X’s reasons for wanting Y to attend School Z rather than School 2 and applied the correct tests in determining whether to uphold Ms X’s appeal. It decided ultimately that the prejudice to School Z from admitting Y outweighed the prejudice to Y from not attending School Z and it therefore refused the appeal. The minutes show the panel gave Ms X an opportunity to compose herself after becoming upset and had Ms X felt she was unable to continue with the hearing she could have asked for an adjournment. Ms X says the clerk incorrectly noted down a statement about her husband’s place of work but this is a point of interpretation. It is unlikely we could ever confirm the words Ms X used during the hearing or say that the way the clerk recorded them wrongly affected the panel’s decision, as the panel were present at the time and reached their decision on the basis of the statements made during the hearing, rather than the clerk’s notes.
15. While the appeal panel decided not to uphold Ms X’s appeal and admit Y to School Z, Ms X confirms Y is currently undergoing assessment for an education, health and care plan (EHCP) which she says will name School Z. Once the EHCP is issued, and if it does name School Z, Y should be offered a place at the school. The Council has also confirmed that it would hold a new appeal for Y once Ms X’s house move is completed, as this would represent a significant and material change in circumstances. Ms X will therefore have a further opportunity to put her case to the Council’s independent school admissions appeals panel; this is the outcome she wants and it is unlikely we could achieve it for her any sooner given our investigation timescales.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the panel considered Ms X’s appeal. It is also unlikely investigation would achieve any worthwhile outcome for Ms X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman