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 daughter (Y). Mrs X questions if the panel properly considered the information presented and says the decision letter missed out key evidence.

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 a year 9 place for Y at her preferred school (School Z). Because School Z was full the Council refused Mrs X’s application. Mrs 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 representative presented their case. They explained the school had reached its Published Admission Number and the difficulties admitting a further child would cause. There was an opportunity for questions. The panel considered the information presented and decided admitting a further child would cause School Z prejudice. The appeal proceeded to the second stage.
8. Mrs X presented her case, and a family member supported her. Mrs X’s case included:
• The difficulties Y faced at her current school and why she needed a place at School Z.
• School Z was close to Mrs X’s parents and Y regularly stayed with them.
• There would be logistical issues if the panel did not offer a place at School Z due to Y’s siblings attending different schools.
• Evidence from a Clinical Psychologist in support of her case.
• Family arrangements including a Child Arrangement Order (CAO).
9. There was a further opportunity for questions. The panel retired and considered all the information presented. It decided Mrs X’s case did not outweigh the prejudice the panel had found at the first stage. The panel unanimously refused the appeal. The clerk wrote to Mrs X with 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. It was in line with the process in the School Admission Appeals Code. The panel decided the school’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. It found prejudice would be caused by admitting a further child. I have not seen any evidence to suggest these decisions were flawed.
12. In her complaint to the Ombudsman Mrs X questioned if the panel properly considered the impact of Y remaining at her current school and the letter from a Clinical Psychologist. Mrs X also asked if the panel considered the CAO and says the decision letter omitted key evidence raised.
13. Based on the evidence available the panel considered all the information before it and reached a decision it was entitled to. The clerk’s notes show Mrs X raised her concerns about Y’s current school and she also referred to evidence from a Clinical Psychologist. The panel explored the key issues during the hearing through its questions. The CAO was also discussed in the appeal. I note this does not say Y needs to attend a specific school. In appeals it is for the panel to decide what weight it gives to the evidence presented.
14. While I was not at the appeal, the evidence available shows the panel properly considered the information presented and decided Mrs X’s case was not strong enough. The decision letter is detailed and contains a summary of the key points and how the panel reached its decision. We would not criticise the panel’s letter.
15. While I understand Mrs 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

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman