Summary: We will not investigate Mr 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 Mr X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for his daughter (Y). Mr X says the Council did not provide enough information about the appeals process. Mr X also says the panel relied on the number of children with SEN as a reason for refusing his appeal. Mr X says this is discrimination.

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. Mr X applied for Y to start Year 7 at his preferred school (School Z). Mr X and his family would be moving closer to the school. 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 considered Mr X’s application from his address at the time he applied. The Council did not offer Y a place at School Z and offered a place at an alternative school. Mr X then moved address and 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 the School’s representative presented their case. They explained the difficulties offering a place would cause. The panel and parents could ask questions.
8. Mr X presented his case which included:
• School Z was close to the family’s new address.
• It had a high standard of education and teaching staff.
• Concerns about the school offered and its location.
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. Mr X says the Council did not provide enough information about the appeals process and the information it would accept. The School Admission Appeals Code sets out an admission authority’s duties to advise parents of their right of appeal, the relevant deadlines, and that admission authorities must not limit the grounds on which appeals can be made. There is no evidence the Council did not meet this requirement and information about the appeals process is on the Council’s website. It is for appellants to decide what information they submit with their appeal.
13. Mr X is unhappy the panel referred to the number of children with SEN as a reason for refusing the appeal. But it is the panel’s role to consider all the information before it. The panel considered the information submitted by Mr X and presented by School Z. This includes the key points raised in the appeal. The panel needs to decide what weight to give to each piece of evidence. It would be wrong for the panel not to consider the number of children with SEN. Having considered all the information available, the panel reached a decision it was entitled to. The clerk’s notes record the panel’s deliberations and match the decision letter.
14. While I understand Mr 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 Mr 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