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 by the panel for us to be able to question its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her daughter (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 the complainant and Broughton Hall High School (the School).
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X applied for Y to start Year 7 in September 2024. Mrs X submitted an on-time application naming two schools. The Council offered Y a place at Mrs X’s second preference. Mrs X then submitted a late application for a place at Broughton Hall. Because it had already offered all its places, the School refused Mrs X’s application. Mrs X appealed the decision to an independent appeal panel. Mrs X asked for her appeal to be heard in absence.
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.
7. The panel considered information from Mrs X and the School. It decided the School’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 the School prejudice.
8. 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 the School. The panel refused the appeal. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.
9. 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.
10. 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 from each party. The clerk’s notes record the panel’s deliberations and correspond with the decision letter.
11. 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

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman