Summary: Mrs M complains about the Independent Appeal Panel’s decision not to admit her children to a primary school. There is no fault in the Panel’s decision. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions taken without fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs M complains about an Independent Appeal Panel’s decision not to admit her children to a primary school. She believes there were places available at the school which should have been offered to her children.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about 'maladministration' and 'service failure'. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. The Ombudsman cannot question a school admission appeal panel's decision simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider if there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3))
3. We check the Independent Appeal Panel followed the Code of Practice issued by the Department for Education and the hearing was fair. We do this by examining the notes taken by the Clerk during the hearing. We do not have the power to overturn the Panel's decision, and we cannot give a child a place at the school.
4. If we are satisfied with a panel'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. I have considered:
• Mrs M’s comments;
• all the information presented to the Appeal Panel, the notes taken by the Clerk during the appeal, and the Panel’s decision letter following the appeal; and
• the School Admissions Appeals Code.
6. I invited Mrs M and the Council to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. The school is a community school. The Local Authority is the Admission Authority and is responsible for admissions and appeals.
8. Mrs M applied for places for her children in year 1. Her application and subsequent appeal were unsuccessful. Mrs M complained to the Ombudsman.
9. The Ombudsman checks the appeal was carried out properly. We do not decide whether Mrs M’s children should be given places at the school.
10. The School Admission Appeals Code issued by the Department for Education sets out the process the Independent Appeal Panel must follow when considering an appeal.
11. No more than 30 children can be taught by a single teacher in an infant class (Reception and Years 1 and 2). If this is not possible without reorganisation or employing extra staff, and this would harm the education of other pupils, “infant class size prejudice” rules apply to the appeal.
12. When infant class size prejudice rules apply, the Appeal Panel can only legally uphold an appeal if:
1. the child would have been offered a place were it not for some flaw in the admission arrangements; and/or
2. the child would have been offered a place if the admissions arrangements had been implemented properly; and/or
3. the decision to refuse a place was “perverse in light of the admission arrangements” and one no reasonable authority would have made.
13. The threshold for appeals made under c. above is extremely high. The Panel cannot legally uphold appeals which do not fall into the categories above, no matter how persuasive the appeal otherwise is.
14. The “infant class size prejudice” rules apply to the year group in which a parent is seeking a place and to subsequent years of the infant phase as those children move through the school. This means there could be places available at the time of the appeal hearing, but the Panel might decide that future changes in the organisation of classes would lead to a breach of the infant class size limit if additional pupils were admitted.
15. There was considerable discussion about the organisation of classes at the school during the hearing. Some children were taught in the year below their age group at the time of the hearing, and another was hoping to transfer to a different school. However, the school intended the children taught in the year below their age group to return to their class, and year one would then be full.
16. The Panel concluded the infant class size prejudice rules applied to Mrs M’s appeal.
17. There is no fault in the Panel’s decision. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions taken without fault.
18. The Panel then considered why Mrs M wanted her children to move to the school. I have not included the details here to ensure Mrs M and her children’s anonymity.
19. The Panel concluded the decision to refuse places for Mrs M’s children was not “perverse in light of the admission arrangements” or one no reasonable authority would have made. The Panel could not, therefore, admit Mrs M’s children to the school. There is no fault in the Panel’s decision. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions made without fault.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I have ended my investigation. There is no fault in the Independent Appeal Panel’s decision not to admit Mrs M’s children to the school.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman