Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a school admissions appeal panel refusing an appeal. It is unlikely we would find fault which caused Mr X to lose out on a school place.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council’s schools’ admissions appeals panel should have granted his child, Y, a place at School Z.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way a school admissions appeals panel made its decision. If there was no fault in how the panel made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X which included the appeal panel’s decision letter and other appeal documents.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

The appeals’ process

6. Statutory guidance about school admissions and appeals can be found in The School Admissions Code and School Admission Appeals Code. Both are published by the Department for Education. 
7. Parents/carers have the right to appeal an admission authority’s decision not to offer their child a school place.  
8. Appeal hearings must be held in private and conducted in the presence of all panel members and parties. Appeal panels must act according to the principles of natural justice. 
9. A clerk supports the appeal panel. Parents can give information in support of their appeal.
10. The admission authority must provide a presenting officer at the hearing to explain the decision not to admit the child and to answer questions from the appellant and panel. 
11. Appeal panels must allow appellants the opportunity to make oral representations.
12. Appeal panels must either uphold or dismiss an appeal and must not uphold an appeal subject to any conditions. Appeals must be decided by a simple majority of votes cast. A panel’s decision that a child shall be admitted to a school is binding on the admission authority concerned. 
13. The clerk to the panel must write to the appellant, the admission authority and the council with the panel’s decision and reasons. 
14. Panels must follow a two-stage decision making process. 
15. Stage 1: the panel examines the decision to refuse admission. The panel must consider whether: 
• the admissions arrangements complied with the mandatory requirements set out in the School Admissions Code; 
• the admission arrangements were applied correctly; and if 
• the admission of additional children would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.  
16. If a panel decides that admitting further children would “prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources” they move to the second stage of the process. 
17. Stage 2: balancing the arguments. The panel must balance the prejudice to the school against the appellant’s case for the child to be admitted.  

The events in this case

18. Mr X applied for a place at School Z in 2022 for September entry in 2023. He was not successful and unsuccessfully appealed the decision to refuse a place in May 2023. When he applied and appealed the allocated school was closer to his home than School Z.
19. Mr X and his family moved home in December 2023. They have moved closer to School Z. The journey to the allocated school became three miles. Mr X applied again for a place at School Z. The Council refused his application as the school year was full. Mr X appealed unsuccessfully in October 2024. His appeal argued:
• The travel distance was tiring for Y;
• School Z was better suited to Y’s needs; and
• Y could not attend all the after school clubs they wanted to due to the lack of buses after the activities ended.
20. Mr X says:
• The presenting officer did not present Mr X’s case properly
• The appeal panel decision is about administration issues and not their personal reasons for appealing.
• He does not know why people have been added to the waiting list. He says it is not transparent enough.
• It is not clear why 10 extra pupils were added to School Z.

Analysis

21. We will not look at the 2023 appeal as there are no good reasons the late complaint rule should not apply.
22. The Schools Admissions Appeals Code sets out how appeals should be held. The presenting officer’s role is not to present and argue the parent’s case. We are unlikely to find fault in the presenting officer not doing so in this case.
23. The appeal panel’s detailed decision letter records the reasons Mr X gave the appeal panel for wanting a place, including their personal reasons. It is unlikely we would find fault in the appeal panel’s decision based on the information I have seen which supports its decision.
24. Due to Data Protection rules, Mr X has no legal right to know why other people have been added to the waiting list or to the school. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council not providing that information.

Back to top

Final decision

25. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault in the appeal panel’s decision which has caused them to lose out on a place at School Z.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman