Summary: We will not investigate Miss 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. Miss X complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her son (Y). Miss X says the Council made a mistake with her address when it considered her original application for a school place.

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. Miss 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 Miss X’s third choice of school. Miss X says she contacted the Council about its decision and to check it had used the correct address as there are two streets in the area with the same name. Miss X says the Council originally told her she was not in the Geographical Priority Area (GPA) for School Z. Miss X says the Council then told her she did live in the GPA. Miss X questions if the Council used the wrong address when it considered her original application. Miss X appealed the Council’s decision not to offer Y a place at School Z.

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.

The appeal

7. The clerk’s notes show School Z’s representatives presented the school’s case. They explained the difficulties offering a place would cause. The panel and parents could ask questions.
8. Miss X presented her case and explained why she wanted a place at School Z. She explained it was the closest school and was within walking distance. Friends would help with childcare and transport to school. Y did not want to attend the school offered and Miss X had only listed it as the system would not let her choose only School Z.
9. 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 Miss 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 Miss 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

10. We are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions when the proper process was followed, and decisions were properly taken.
11. 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.
12. 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 Miss X. This includes the key points raised in the appeal. The clerk’s notes record the panel’s deliberations and match the decision letter.
13. I note School Z offered places down to children in the oversubscription criterion “In GPA without a sibling” to a distance of 1.632 miles. The papers I have seen show Y’s application was considered “In GPA without a sibling” with a distance of 1.685 miles to the school – further than the last place offered. This is the correct address and so the Council was right to not offer Y a place. Even if the Council had used a wrong address, which was further away, it would not have made a difference – Y would simply have still not been offered a place. However, I have not seen any evidence of such fault. More importantly, and as explained above, the panel decided the application had been properly dealt with. That is a decision the panel is entitled to reach, and without evidence of fault in the decision-making process, is not one we can question.
14. While I understand Miss 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

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman