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

The complaint

1. Mr X says the School’s admissions appeals panel should have granted his child, B, 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 Mr 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. Mr X applied on time for a place in year five at School Y. The Council refused the application as the school year was full.
18. Mr X appealed to the Council’s schools’ admissions appeals panel. It considered his appeal in June 2026. The points he told the appeal panel included:
• B’s had been bullied at their current school.
• B had previously attended School Y and had been settled and happy.
• School Y was convenient for the family.
19. The appeal panel dismissed the appeal. It said Mr X’s case did not outweigh the prejudice to School Y of having B in the school.
20. Mr X believes they have been unfairly treated. He says the appeal panel did not properly consider their case.

Analysis

21. The Code requires the Appeal Panel’s decision letter to be a summary of the relevant factors. It does not have to address in detail each and every point the parent makes. The Appeal Panel in this case set out a summary of Mr X’s case. It decided the school was full and that there are many other schools within a reasonable distance from Mr X’s home. The Appeal Panel was provided with evidence showing there were six schools with places within the statutory walking distance of three miles.
22. Mr X says the Appeal Panel referring to the bullying as ‘low level’ shows it failed to consider it properly. We would consider that applying an adjective such as ‘low level’ demonstrates the Appeal Panel did consider it.
23. The Appeal Panel’s clerk’s notes show it considered Mr X case. We are unlikely to find it is fault not to detail every element of his case.
24. 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

25. We will not investigate Mr 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