Summary: We will not investigate Ms 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 Ms X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her son (Y). Ms X questions if the panel properly considered information provided in support of her appeal. Ms X refers to a similar appeal from another parent which the panel upheld.

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. Ms X applied for her son (Y) to start year 7 in September 2025 at her preferred school (School Z). Because there were more applications than places available, the Council used School Z’s oversubscription criteria to decide which children it would offer places. The Council did not offer Y a place at School Z. It instead offered him a place at an alternative school. Ms X appealed the Council’s decision not to offer Y a place at School Z.
6. In her written appeal Ms X referred to Y’s dyslexia, how he has previously struggled to attend school, and the reasons for this. Ms X said the support which has previously helped Y is part of School Z’s ethos. Ms X explained how Y finds busy environments overwhelming, and the school offered by the Council was too large.

The appeals process

7. 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.

The appeal

8. The clerk’s notes show School Z’s representative presented the school’s case. They explained the difficulties offering a place would cause. The panel and parents could ask questions.
9. Ms X presented her own case and explained why she wanted Y to attend School Z. Y’s father also attended the appeal. The information Ms Z presented was in line with her written appeal. The panel asked questions.
10. The panel considered the information presented. The panel decided School Z’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. They decided there were no errors with how the Council had handled Ms X’s application. The panel decided admitting a further child would cause the school prejudice. The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Ms 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. We are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions when the proper process was followed, and decisions were properly taken.
12. Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider the appeal.
13. Ms X has questioned if the panel properly considered the information presented. In particular, issues around Y’s mental health and the reasons he has previously struggled to attend school.
14. Based on the information I have seen there is not enough evidence to suggest the panel did not consider the key issues raised. They are recorded in the clerk’s notes as part of Ms X’s presentation and also the panel’s deliberations. They are mentioned in the decision-making section of the clerk’s notes.
15. Ms X refers to a similar appeal which was successful. But panels need to consider each appeal on its merits. If the panel upheld another appeal, that is not evidence of fault here. Also, we can only look at how the panel dealt with Ms X’s case based on the evidence available.
16. The panel considered all the information before it and reached a decision it was entitled to. It considered the information presented by School Z and Ms X. This includes the key points raised in the appeal. The clerk’s notes record the panel’s deliberations and match the decision letter.
17. While I understand Ms X is unhappy her appeal was unsuccessful, there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to become involved. We will not therefore investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman