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 son (Y). Mrs X questions if the panel properly considered her case and refers to the panel upholding other appeals.

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. Mrs X applied for Y to join year 7 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 offered a place at an alternative and Mrs X appealed the 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 their case. They explained the difficulties offering a place would cause. The panel and parents could ask questions.
8. Mrs X presented her case which included:
• The reasons she wanted a place at School Z, including Y’s special educational needs.
• Concerns about the school offered and that no children from Y’s primary school would be attending.
• Mrs X hoped the family would be moving closer to School Z.
9. The panel did not identify any issues with School Z’s admission arrangements or how they had been applied. The panel decided admitting a further child would cause School Z prejudice. The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Y’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 submitted by Mrs X and presented by School Z. This includes the key points raised in the appeal. The clerk’s notes record the panel’s deliberations and match the decision letter.
13. Mrs X has referred to the panel upholding other appeals. But panels need to look at the merits of each case. Upholding other appeals and not Mrs X’s does not mean the panel acted with fault.
14. While I understand Mrs X is unhappy the 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 Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman