Summary: We found fault on Mrs Y’s complaint about the appeal panel’s failure to properly consider her appeal against the Council’s decision, acting as admission authority, to reject her application for her daughter to transfer to another school. There was a failure to show the appeal was properly decided. The decision letter failed to explain the reason for the decision. The Council agreed to send a written apology, arrange a new appeal hearing with a different panel, and provide guidance to the clerk to the panel.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complains about the appeal panel’s failure to properly consider all the evidence she sent, including safeguarding information, when it refused her appeal against the Council’s decision to reject her application for her daughter to transfer to the preferred school; as a result, she remains in a school which is unsafe, all of which is further affecting her mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Mrs Y, the Council’s response to my enquiries, as well as relevant law, policy, and guidance. I sent a copy of my draft decision to Mrs Y and the Council. I considered their responses. Having done so, I sent a copy of my final decision to Mrs Y and the Council.

Back to top

What I found

School Admission Appeals Code (October 2022)

5. Under the Code, the panel must ensure the decision sent following the hearing is easily comprehensible so the parties can understand the basis of the decision. The decision letter must contain a summary of relevant factors raised by the parties and considered by the panel. It must give clear reasons for the panel’s decision, including how and why any issues of fact or law were decided by the panel during the hearing. (paragraph 2.28)
6. The clerk must ensure an accurate record is taken of the points raised at the hearing, including the proceedings, attendance, voting, and reasons for decisions. (paragraph 2.29)
7. Under the Code, panels must follow the two-stage decision making process for all appeals, except for infant class size appeals (paragraph 3.1 to 3.10):

First Stage: examining the decision to refuse admission

8. The panel must consider the following for each child subject to an appeal:
1. whether the admission arrangements complied with the mandatory requirements of the School Admissions Code and Part 3 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998; and
2. whether the admission arrangements were correctly and impartially applied in the case in question.
9. The panel must then decide whether the admission of further children would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.
10. The panel must uphold the appeal at first stage where:
1. it finds the admission arrangements did not comply with admissions law or had not been correctly and impartially applied, and the child would have been offered a place if the arrangements had complied, or had been correctly and impartially applied; or
2. it finds the admission of additional children would not prejudice the provision of efficient education or efficient use of resources. (paragraph 3.5)
11. The panel must go the second stage where: it finds the admission arrangements complied with admissions law and they were correctly and impartially applied to the child or; finds the admission arrangements did not comply with admissions law or were not correctly and impartially applied but that if they had, and been correctly and impartially applied, the child would not have been offered a place and; it finds the admission of further children would prejudice the provision of efficient education or efficient use of resources. (paragraph 3.7)

Second Stage: balancing the arguments

12. The panel must balance the prejudice to the school against the appellant’s case for the child to be admitted to the school. It must take account of the appellant’s reasons for expressing a preference for the school, including what the school can offer the child the allocated or other schools cannot. If the panel considers the appellant’s case outweighs the prejudice to the school, it must uphold the appeal. (paragraph 3.8)
13. It must consider the impact on the school of admitting further children.

What happened

14. Mrs Y has a daughter who is in Year 9 at school. In September 2025, Mrs Y sent an ‘in year’ application to the Council, as admission authority, for her daughter to transfer from her current school to her preferred school. This was because she was worried about her daughter’s wellbeing. On her application, she explained this was because she was bullied at school and had been for the last two years. She had become isolated as her mental health suffered and her attendance at school slipped. Mrs Y believed the preferred school would offer her the fresh start she urgently needed, especially as she started to have suicidal thoughts.
15. The Council refused her request because the preferred school was full. Mrs Y appealed the decision.
16. In her appeal, she explained her daughter received help from Child Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Evidence from CAMHS said the bullying had been ‘prolonged and severe’ and had a serious impact on her mental health. It also noted there were concerns about lack of effective safeguarding measures at school where there was no clear and robust support plan in place.
17. Mrs Y also sent evidence of the bullying her daughter received, which included copy text messages. She sent evidence from her daughter’s social worker which supported a transfer and pointed out there was a relationship breakdown between Mrs Y and the school. She sent a letter from a counselling service that had been helping her daughter.
18. In December, the appeal panel rejected her appeal.
19. Mrs Y was unhappy with the appeal panel’s decision. She believed it failed to consider the safeguarding evidence she submitted setting out the impact on her daughter. She believed this because the panel’s decision letter failed to refer to any of it.
20. The minutes of the hearing show the panel considered the following: Mrs Y’s failure to show why other schools were not appropriate, or if any others had been considered at all; concerns about the urgency for a move; the clerk telling the panel that no matter the decision, the pace at which she could attend a school with a space, or the preferred school, would likely be the same; the submitted evidence and whether it was clear only the preferred school could support her, which it was not; whether the bullying meant her needs outweighed the prejudice to the school by admitting another child.
21. The decision letter to Mrs Y said the panel considered the appeal in two stages:

• At stage 1, it had to satisfy itself that the school’s published admission arrangements complied with the law and were correctly and impartially applied, as well as the admission number being a ‘justified limit’. It explained the arrangements were lawful and were correctly applied in her daughter’s case. The panel was also satisfied giving her a place would prejudice the provision of efficient or the efficient use of resources. This was because it would impact all the children affected in terms of crowding, school facilities, and reduced teaching.
• At stage 2, it considered the consequences for the admission authority and school should they comply with her wish and how serious the consequences would be. It considered the reasons she put and agreed that, on balance, her reasons did not outweigh the prejudice that would be caused.

22. In response to our enquiries, the Council confirmed:

• The minutes of the hearing records ‘Yes’ to the question ‘Stage 1 correct?’ The panel followed a flowchart, a copy of which I have seen, to guide them through the decision-making process.
• The panel then went on to consider whether the admission of a further child would prejudice the provision of efficient education or use of resources. The clerk said the ‘Yes’ recorded, confirmed this had happened.
• The panel considered the information Mrs Y sent but, as this did not say the preferred school was the only school that could provide support for her daughter, and the presenting officer said there were other schools in the area which could offer her a place, it was not ‘considered critically determining’.
• The panel accepted the case set out by the school in its submissions about why it could not accommodate another child.
• The decision letter focused on the key issues raised by the parent and was not intended to be exhaustive. It referred to the panel considering all the information sent by her and the Council.
• The panel discussed whether there was an urgency for moving her daughter from the current school to the preferred school

My findings

23. I found fault on this complaint for the following reasons:
1. Although the decision letter explained how the panel considered her appeal at the first stage of the hearing, I am not satisfied the minutes supported what the letter said. This was because the minutes only record, ‘Stage 1 correct? Yes’.
2. The minutes failed to show the panel considering whether the admission arrangements complied with the law and were correctly and impartially applied. Nor did they show the panel considering whether the admission of another child would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.
3. While the Council said the panel used a flow chart to decide these issues, there was no record of it doing so. The flowchart was a tool to help the panel make its decision but, its presence alone was not evidence the panel used and followed it correctly, or at all. This was why the minutes were important evidence as they were made during the hearing. I consider there was a failure to show the panel followed the Code when it decided the appeal at the first stage. This was fault.
4. The law then required the panel to go on to balance the prejudice to the school against Mrs Y’s case for her daughter’s admission. It had to take account of her reasons for expressing a preference for the school, including what the preferred school could offer that the school she went to, or other schools, could not.
5. I am not satisfied the minutes compiled with paragraph 2.29 of the Code, which was fault. The minutes showed the panel considered and discussed the submitted evidence Mrs Y sent. While they record the decision, they do not show the reasoning for the decision. There was nothing to show how the panel balanced the prejudice that would be caused against the reasons put forward by Mrs Y.
6. I am also not satisfied the letter sent to her explained the reason for the decision at stage 2. While it told her the panel had balanced her reasons against the prejudice that would be caused, and decided they did not outweigh the prejudice, it failed to go on and explain why this was so.
7. I consider this fault as it failed to comply with paragraph 2.28 of the Code which required the letter to give clear reasons for the panel’s decision, including how any issues of fact, or law, were decided by the panel.
24. I consider these failures caused Mrs Y an injustice. She has the uncertainty of not knowing whether the outcome of her appeal would have been different but for the fault found. It has caused her some frustration and stress.

Back to top

Action

25. I considered our guidance on remedies.
26. The Council agreed to take the following action as soon as possible and no later than four weeks of the final decision on this complaint:
1. Send Mrs Y a written apology for the injustice caused by the failure to: show the panel properly considered her appeal at the first stage of the hearing; show the panel properly considered her appeal at the second stage of the hearing; send a decision letter which explained the reasons for the decision.
2. Arrange a new hearing of her appeal with a different appeal panel.
3. Remind the clerk of the need to: make records of appeal panel hearings which show the panel’s consideration and decisions under the first and second stages of the appeal hearing; ensure letters are sent after appeal hearings which give reasons for the decision reached.
27. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

28. I found fault on Mrs Y’s complaint against the Council. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman