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

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her daughter. Miss X is concerned the panel did not properly consider her appeal and says interruptions made it difficult for her to present her case.

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 Holy Family Catholic High School (the School).
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Miss X applied for her daughter (Y) to attend Year 7 at the School. As there were more applications than places available, the School used its oversubscription criteria to decide which children it would offer places. The School did not offer Y a place. Miss 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.

Miss X’s appeal

7. The clerk’s notes show the School’s representative presented their case at the first stage of the appeal. This was attended by all parents appealing for a place. The School’s representative explained how it had offered places. They explained the difficulties offering a place would cause. The panel and parents could ask questions.
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 the School prejudice
9. Miss X presented her case. Miss X explained her concerns about the school the Council had offered Y a place at. Miss X provided written information which expanded on this point. Miss X explained she wanted Y to have a religious education. There was a support network close to the School and the family were looking to move into the area. Miss X provided supporting information from Y’s primary school.
10. The panel considered Miss X’s case and balanced it against the prejudice found in the first part of the hearing. The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Miss X’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting Y would cause the School. The panel refused the appeal. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.

Assessment

11. I understand Miss X is unhappy the 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.
12. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider Miss X’s appeal.
13. Miss X says that interruptions by the panel made it difficult for her to present her case. I was not at the hearing, so can only make a decision based on the evidence available. This includes the clerk’s notes, the panel’s decision letter, and the information Miss X sent with her appeal.
14. The clerk’s note show Miss X presented her case in line with the key points from her written appeal. The panel asked questions about the issues at the heart of Miss X’s case.
15. Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information presented. The panel had access to Miss X’s written appeal. The evidence I have shows the panel considered all the information before it and reached a decision it was entitled to. The clerk’s notes record the panel’s deliberations and correspond with the decision letter.
16. It is clear Miss X found the appeals process difficult. I also do not doubt there were interruptions as the panel explored the reasons for the appeal. But based on the evidence I have seen there is not enough evidence of fault in how the panel considered Miss X’s appeal for us to be able to question its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman