Summary: We will not investigate Mrs 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 Mrs X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her son.

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 Cardinal Heenan Catholic High School (the School).
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Mrs X applied for her son (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. Mrs 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.

Mrs X’s appeal

7. The clerk’s notes show the School’s representative presented their case at the first stage of the appeal. The School’s representative explained how places had been offered. 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. Mrs X presented her case. Mrs X explained why she wanted Y to attend the School. There had been a recent change in the family’s circumstances meaning Mrs X and Y had moved address. There were issues with travelling to the school offered and Cardinal Heenan was much closer. Mrs X provided written evidence in support of her appeal.
10. The panel considered Mrs X’s case. It decided her application had been properly dealt with. The panel balanced Mrs X’s case against the prejudice found in the first part of the hearing. The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Mrs 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 Mrs 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 Mrs X’s appeal.
13. The clerk’s note show Mrs 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 Mrs X’s case.
14. Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information presented. The panel had access to Mrs X’s written appeal. The panel considered Mrs X’s evidence about the problems Y would have with travelling to the school offered. The evidence I have seen 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.
15. Based on the evidence I have seen there is not enough evidence of fault in how the panel considered Mrs X’s appeal for us to be able to question its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mrs 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