Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a school admissions appeal panel refusing his 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 School’s admissions appeals panel should have granted his child, B, a place.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the appeal papers.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

The appeals’ process

5. 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. 
6. Parents/carers have the right to appeal an admission authority’s decision not to offer their child a school place.  
7. 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. 
8. A clerk supports the appeal panel. Parents can give information in support of their appeal.
9. 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. 
10. Appeal panels must allow appellants the opportunity to make oral representations.
11. 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. 
12. The clerk to the panel must write to the appellant, the admission authority and the council with the panel’s decision and reasons. 
13. Panels must follow a two-stage decision making process. 
14. 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.  
15. 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. 
16. 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.  

Events in this case

17. Mr X applied on time for a place at this school. There were more applicants than places. The School applied its schools’ admissions criteria. The last place went to an applicant in a higher category and who lives more than three miles closer to the School than Mr X.
18. The Council granted B a place at their nearest state school with places. It is closer to their home than this School and less than three miles in walking distance.
19. Mr X appealed to the Schools’ admissions appeals panel. It considered his appeal in May 2025. He told the appeal panel B did not want to go to the allocated school and they believed they would be bullied there. They wanted this School. They felt it was the best school for B.
20. The appeal panel dismissed the appeal. It said Mr X’s case did not out weigh the prejudice to the School of having B in the school. Mr X says this is unfair.

Analysis

21. 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. It is a decision it was entitled to take.

Back to top

Final decision

22. 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 this School.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman