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 daughter (Y). Mrs X says the appeal panel placed too much emphasis on the number of children with Special Educational Needs (SEN) or in receipt of the Pupil Premium at her preferred school.

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 the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Mrs X applied for Y to transfer to year 5 at her preferred school (School Z). This is close to Mrs X’s home. School Z’s Published Admission Number (PAN) is 60 and the school has 60 children in year 5. School Z refused Mrs X’s application and she 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 School Z’s representative presented their case at the first stage of the appeal. School Z’s representative explained the difficulties offering a place would cause. The panel and parents could ask questions.
8. Mrs X presented her case. Mrs X explained why she wanted Y to attend the School Z. Mrs X explained School Z was close to her home and the journey to Y’s current school was difficult. Mrs X explained the difficulties it would cause if the panel did not offer a place. The panel could ask further questions.
9. The panel decided School Z’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel decided there were no issues with the processing of Mrs X’s application. The panel decided admitting a further child would cause School Z prejudice.
10. The panel then considered Mrs X’s case and balanced it against the prejudice it had found admitting a further child would cause. 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 School Z. 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 evidence I have seen shows the panel considered all the information before it and reached a decision it was entitled to. It is for the panel to decide what weight it gives to information such as the number of children with SEN or receiving the Pupil Premium. 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