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 and so we cannot question the panel’s decision.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for his son (Y). Mr X is unhappy his son will not be able to attend the same school as his sister.

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 applied for Y to start reception in September 2024. Mr X wanted Y to attend School Z because his daughter already attends this school. There were more applications than places available at School Z. This meant the Council used the school’s oversubscription criteria to decide which children it would offer places. The Council did not offer Y a place at School Z. Mrs X (Y’s mother) appealed the decision not to offer Y a place at School Z.

The appeals process

6. Independent school admission appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. The law says the size of an infant class must not be more than 30 pupils per teacher. There are only limited circumstances in which more than 30 children can be admitted. There are special rules governing appeals for reception and years 1 and 2, where admitting another child would mean there would be more than 30 pupils per teacher. Appeals under these rules are known as “infant class size appeals”. Infant class size legislation applied to the appeal which is the subject of this complaint.
7. The rules say the panel must consider whether:
• admitting another child would breach the class size limit;
• the admission arrangements comply with the law;
• the admission arrangements were properly applied to the case;
• the decision to refuse a place was one which a reasonable authority would have made in the circumstances.
8. What is ‘unreasonable’ is a high test, and for it to be met, the panel would need to be sure the decision to refuse a place was “perverse” or “outrageous”. For that reason, panels rarely find an admission authority’s decision to be unreasonable.

Appeal

9. Mrs X attended the appeal. The clerk’s notes show School Z’s representative presented their case. They explained admitting a further child would breach the infant class size limit. They explained why the Council did not offer Y a place.
10. The panel and Mrs X could ask questions. Mrs X presented her case. Mrs X explained why she wanted Y to attend the school and the difficulties it would cause if the panel did not offer Y a place. There was a further opportunity for questions.
11. In its deliberations the panel considered information about School Z. The panel decided its admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. There had been no errors with how it had handled the application. The panel decided admitting a further child would breach the infant class size limit. The panel decided it was not an unreasonable decision to refuse admission. None of the grounds for allowing an infant class size appeal had been met and so the panel refused the appeal. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.

Assessment

12. I understand Mr X is unhappy the appeal was unsuccessful. But we are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions which were properly taken. As previously explained, the threshold for an infant class size appeal to succeed is very high.
13. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider and decide the appeal. The panel asked questions and explored the issues at the heart of the appeal.
14. The panel considered all the information it was presented with and reached a decision it was entitled to. The clerk’s decision letter contained sufficient information about the panel’s decision.
15. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the panel considered and decided the appeal for the Ombudsman to become involved. An investigation is not therefore appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman