Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel’s failure to provide his child with a place at School Y. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault which caused them to lose out on a school place.

The complaint

1. Mr X, says the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel did not properly consider his appeal for a place for his child, Z, at School Y.

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 a 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 must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:
• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
4. the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X, and the appeal papers provided by the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and the Schools Admissions Appeals Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Background information

7. Mr X applied for his child Z to have a place at School Y starting in year three immediately. The Council declined the application because the year group was full.
8. Mr X appealed for a place. His appeal included:
• A sibling attended School Y and he wanted his children in the same school.
• It took up too much time taking two children to two different schools.
• Z had a friend at School Y.
9. An Independent Appeal Panel considered his appeal in May 2024. The Appeal Panel decided not to award a place.
10. Mr X disagreed and complained to the Ombudsman. He says:
1. He does not believe the decision letter provides enough detail;
2. The Appeal Panel did not properly consider his case, which he considers strong.

The appeal panel and our role

11. Independent Appeal Panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. The panel must consider whether the:
• admission arrangements comply with the law;
• admission arrangements were properly applied to the case; and
• admission of another child would prejudice the education of others.
12. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. If the Appeal 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.
13. It is unlikely we would find fault in the Appeal Panel’s decision based on the information I have seen which supports the Appeal Panel’s decision.
14. The Appeal Panel decision letter shows the Appeal Panel actively considered the case. It is not required to show how it exactly weighed up each factor. It has given reasons for its decision. It said the reasons Z wanted a place did not outweigh the prejudice caused to School Y should Z be admitted. It is unlikely we would find fault in the decision letter.

Back to top

Final decision

15. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault which caused Mr X the injustice she alleges.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman