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. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her daughter (Y).

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 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 the school’s oversubscription criteria to decide which children it would offer places. The Council did not offer Y a place at School Z and Miss X appealed the Council’s decision.

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 school had offered over its Published Admission Number and the difficulties offering further places would cause. There was an opportunity for questions. Miss X did not attend the appeal and so the panel considered her written case which included:
• It was not practical for Y to attend the school offered.
• Miss X worked next to School Z.
• Y needed to attend a school with her friends, and they would be attending School Z.
• There would be an impact on Y’s mental health if the panel did not offer a place.
8. The panel decided School Z’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. 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

9. We are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions when the proper process was followed, and decisions were properly taken.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Miss X says other appeals were successful. But this is not evidence of fault. Panels need to look at each case individually and it is for panels to decide the merits of each appeal. We can only look at how the panel considered Miss X’s appeal.
13. 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

14. 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