Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s School Admissions Appeal Panel’s handling of her appeal against the refusal to offer her child a place at her preferred school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault affecting the panel’s decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains the Council’s School Admissions Appeal Panel did not properly consider her appeal for a reception place at her preferred school (School Z) for her child, 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 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 Miss X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X applied for a place for Y in reception at School Z from September 2024. She says she applied by post but the Council did not receive her application; when she later applied online the Council, as admissions authority, treated her application as late.
6. School Z had more applications than spaces available so the Council allocated places at the school to those children whose parents had applied on-time and whose applications scored highest against its oversubscription criteria. It accepts Y would have been allocated a place at the school had Miss X applied on-time but because her application was late there were no places left.

The appeals process

7. Independent appeal panels must follow the School Admissions Appeals Code 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. An admissions authority can also refuse an application on the basis it will breach the infant class size limit in the future.
8. When a school receives more applications than it has places (the ‘published admissions number’, or PAN), the applications will be ranked according to its over-subscription criteria. Each application will be placed into the highest appropriate criterion, and places are then allocated in descending order of rank.
9. If a child is not allocated a place in their preferred school they may appeal. There are special rules governing appeals for reception and Years 1 and 2. Appeals under these rules are known as “infant class size appeals”. 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.
10. An appeal panel can only overturn an admissions authority’s decision to refuse a place if they find one or more of these points do not apply and that had the decision been taken properly, the child would have been allocated a place at the school.
11. What is ‘reasonable’ is a high test. The panel needs to be sure that to refuse a place was “perverse” or “outrageous”. For that reason, panels rarely find an admission authority’s decision to be unreasonable in light of the admission arrangements.
12. The clerk must ensure an accurate record is taken of the points raised at the hearing, including the proceedings, attendance, voting, and reasons for decisions.

Analysis

13. Our role is to check appeals have been carried out properly. We do not provide a further right of appeal or decide whether a child should be given a place at a school and we cannot question the merits of decisions properly taken. If the 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.
14. The evidence shows the Council properly considered Miss X’s appeal but accepted admitting another child to the school would result in a future breach of the infant class size limit. It considered Miss X’s circumstances but felt the Council had fairly and properly applied its admissions arrangements and there was not enough evidence to show the original decision to refuse her application was “unreasonable”. It therefore had no choice but to refuse Miss X’s appeal.
15. I appreciate Miss X disagrees with the panel’s decision but I have not seen enough evidence of fault to question it.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault affecting the Council's School Admissions Appeal Panel’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman