Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to be able to question the merits of its decision.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her daughter.

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 Archbishop Blanch School (the School).
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Ms 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. Ms 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.

The appeal

7. Ms X attended the appeal. The clerk’s notes show the School’s representative presented their case at the first stage of the process. They explained the difficulties offering a place would cause. The panel decided the School’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel and parents could ask questions. The panel decided that admitting a further child would cause prejudice to the school.
8. Ms X presented her case at the next stage of the process. Ms X expanded on her written appeal and why she wanted Y to attend the School. Ms X explained:
• The family lives close to the school.
• She has four children and there would be logistical issues if the panel did not offer Y a place.
• Her neighbour’s daughter already attends the School.
• She wanted Y to continue with her education in a faith school.
• She wanted Y to attend an all-girls school.
• Y had struggled with her mental health since the School refused her application.
9. The panel considered what Ms X had said and the written information she had sent before the appeal. The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Ms X’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting Y would cause the School. The panel refused the appeal. The clerk wrote to Ms X with the panel’s decision.

Assessment

10. We are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions when the proper process was followed and decisions were properly taken.
11. The clerk’s notes show the panel followed the correct process to consider Ms X’s appeal. All parties could present their cases and ask questions.
12. The clerk’s notes record the panel’s deliberations and correspond with the decision letter. The letter shows the panel considered the key tests required by the School Admission Appeals Code. These include the lawfulness and application of the School’s admission arrangements and the issue of prejudice. I do think the letter could have contained more information about exactly how the panel decided Ms X’s appeal. How decisions were reached is not the same as the decisions themselves.
13. But the clerk’s notes clearly show the panel’s decision-making process. They show the information considered and how the panel reached the key decisions. The panel took into account the information presented by the School and Ms X. This includes the key points Ms X raised in her appeal. The panel also had access to Ms X’s written appeal. The panel considered all the information before it and reached a decision it was entitled to.
14. So, even if a more detailed letter would have been helpful, the decision reached would have been the same. There is not enough evidence of fault by the panel to warrant an investigation. The panel properly considered the appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman