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

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for his 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 Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Mr X and his family moved into the Councils area. Mr X’s son (Y) sat the entrance test for a place at his preferred school (School Z). This is a selective / grammar school. School Z uses the entrance test to decide if children are of the required academic standard to attend. Results from the entrance test are used along with School Z’s oversubscription criteria to decide which children the school will offer places.
6. The pass mark for the test is 180. Students are required to score at least 40 in each of the three parts of the test. Y met this requirement but only scored a total mark of 171. The school had already offered all its places and did not consider Y to be of grammar school ability because of his result in the entrance test. School Z refused Mr X’s application and he appealed the decision.

The appeals process

7. 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.
8. In appeals for selective schools the panel needs to decide if the appellant’s child meets the necessary academic standard. If they decide this is not the case, then the panel cannot uphold the appeal.
9. If the child meets the academic standard and the panel decides the school can offer a place without it causing ‘prejudice’ to the school, then they must offer a place.
10. If the child meets the academic standard and the panel decides the school cannot offer a place without it causing ‘prejudice’ to the school, they need to balance the appellant’s case against the prejudice to the school.

Mr X’s appeal

11. In Mr X’s written appeal, he explained why he wanted Y to attend School Z. Mr X explained Y had easily scored the required mark for a grammar school in his previous home authority. Mr X explained Y had not studied some material contained in the entrance test for School Z. Mr X referred to health problems suffered by Y and the family’s circumstances.
12. The clerk’s notes show that on the day of the appeal School Z’s representative presented their case. They explained how places had been offered. The panel and Mr X could ask questions. Mr X presented his case which expanded on the information he had already sent. There was a further opportunity for questions.
13. The panel deliberated Mr X’s case. The panel decided School Z’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel decided admitting a child would cause School Z prejudice. But more importantly, the panel decided there was not enough evidence to show Y was of grammar school ability. The panel refused the appeal and the clerk’s letter explained the decision.

Assessment

14. I understand Mr X is unhappy his appeal was unsuccessful. But we are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions which were properly taken.
15. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider and decide Mr X’s appeal.
16. Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. The evidence I have seen shows the panel considered all the information presented. It is for the panel to decide the weight it gives to each piece of evidence.
17. The panel considered the required questions. Its decision there was insufficient evidence to show Y was of grammar school ability is one the panel was entitled to reach and which the clerk’s letter explained.
18. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the panel considered Mr X’s appeal to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

19. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault for us to question the panel’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman