Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s school admissions panel’s decision to refuse her appeal against the refusal of her application for a place for her daughter (Y). She says the panel failed to take account of the reasons for her appeal including her heritage, health problems and the fact she does not drive. She is concerned that it would not be safe for Y to travel to the school allocated and that she does not have any friends there.

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 Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

The appeals process

5. Parents/carers have the right to appeal an admission authority’s decision not to offer their child a place at their preferred school.
6. Appeals must follow a two-stage process. The first stage requires the panel to examine 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.
7. If the panel decides these tests are met it must balance the prejudice to the school from admitting another pupil against the prejudice caused to the child by not admitting them. If the panel decides the prejudice to the child outweighs the prejudice to the school it may overturn the decision and admit the child.

Y’s case

8. The Council provided Ms X with the relevant information for her appeal.
9. The school presented its case and the panel was satisfied the tests set out at Paragraph 6 were met.
10. Ms X made her appeal in writing and presented her case to the panel. She explained the school she was appealing for is closer to her address and she works nearby. She said Y has friends going to the school and she believed it would be difficult for her to make friends at the school offered. She also told the panel she does not drive and did not feel it was safe for Y to travel to the school offered alone. She said she and Y are refugees and she believes the environment at her preferred school would be better for Y as there will be other children from the same background there.
11. The panel considered the school’s arguments against those made by Ms X but decided the prejudice to the school from admitting another child outweighed any prejudice that would be caused to Y from not admitting her. It therefore refused Ms X’s appeal.
12. I understand Ms X disagrees with the panel’s decision but we are not an appeal body and we cannot therefore question a decision when there is no evidence of fault in the way it was made.
13. The panel considered all the information before it and reached a decision it was entitled to. The clerk’s notes record the panel’s deliberations and the reasons for refusing the appeal match the decision letter provided to Ms X.
14. The decision took account of Ms X’s comments and the reasons for her appeal and although I appreciate Ms X remains unhappy that her appeal was unsuccessful, I have seen no evidence of fault in the way it was reached.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the appeal panel.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman