Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s school’s admissions appeal panel refusing her appeal. It is unlikely we would find fault which caused Mrs X to lose out on a school place.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council’s school’s admissions appeals panel should have granted her child, D, a place at School Y.

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 Mrs 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. Mrs X applied for a place for her child, D, to start at School Y in year seven from September 2025. School Y had agreed to take five more pupils above its published admission number due to a bulge year. There were more applicants than places. Mrs X missed out on distance.
18. Mrs X bought a new home closer to School Y and moved in June 2025.
19. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision to refuse her a place. She told the appeal panel, in summary:
• She was imminently due to move to a home closer to School Y and provided evidence of this.
• Why she believed D was a vulnerable child who needed to be in a smaller nurturing school.
• She believed School Y’s met D’s needs better than any other school.
• School Y is an easy walk from their new home.
• She had no other school place she was happy for D to attend within a reasonable distance of their home
20. The appeal panel dismissed the appeal. It decided the prejudice to School Y of admitting D outweighed the reasons why Mrs X wanted a place for D.
21. Mrs X disagrees with this decision. She says the Council has not provided her with a school place.

Analysis

22. The appeal panels full decision letter was sent more than five days after appeal. The Council says it had good reason to send this late due to the amount of appeals for this school. Also, Mrs X had been informed of the result within five days. We are unlikely to find any delay in sending the detailed decision letter is significant enough fault to justify an investigation or that it has caused Mrs X any significant injustice given she had been told the result within five days.
23. The Council replied to Mrs X’s complaint made following the appeal. It confirmed a nearer school to Mrs X’s home than School Y had places. It is open to Mrs X to apply for a place at that school.
24. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether you disagree with the decision the organisation made.
25. It is clear from the appeal panel’s very detailed decision letter the appeal panel actively considered the case before making its decision. 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

26. We will not investigate Mrs 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 School Y.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman