Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a school admission appeal. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault for us to be able to question the panel’s decision.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the school admissions appeal hearing. She says she was not able to fully explain her case and believes the panel did not properly consider her child’s needs. Mrs X wants the Council to arrange a fresh appeal hearing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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. 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

The appeals process

5. Independent appeal panels must follow the School Admissions Appeals Code when considering an appeal. The law says the size of an infant class must not be more than 30 pupils per teacher. There are only limited circumstances in which more than 30 children can be admitted.
6. When a school receives more applications than it has places (the ‘published admissions number’, or PAN), the applications will be ranked according to its over-subscription criteria. Each application will be placed into the highest appropriate criterion, and places are then allocated in descending order of rank.
7. If a child is not allocated a place in their preferred school they may appeal. There are special rules governing appeals for reception and Years 1 and 2. Appeals under these rules are known as “infant class size appeals”. The rules say the panel must consider whether:

• admitting another child would breach the class size limit;
• the admission arrangements comply with the law;
• the admission arrangements were properly applied to the case;
• the decision to refuse a place was one which a reasonable authority would have made in the circumstances.

8. An appeal panel can only overturn an admissions authority’s decision to refuse a place if they find one or more of these points do not apply and that had the decision been taken properly, the child would have been allocated a place at the school.
9. What is ‘reasonable’ is a high test. The panel needs to be sure that to refuse a place was “perverse” or “outrageous”. For that reason, panels rarely find an admission authority’s decision to be unreasonable in light of the admission arrangements.
10. 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.

Back to top

Analysis

11. Our role is to check appeals have been carried out properly. We do not provide a further right of appeal or decide whether a child should be given a place at a school and we cannot question the merits of decisions properly taken. If the panel has been properly informed, and used the correct procedure, then it is entitled to come to its own judgment about the evidence it hears.
12. The evidence available in this case shows the Council as the admissions authority wrote to Mrs X to explain the reasons it refused her application.
13. Mrs X appealed against the Council’s decision. She provided details about the family’s circumstances, medical issues and the reasons she wanted her child to attend that school.
14. The panel considered Mrs X’s appeal but found that admitting her child to the school would breach the infant class size limit, that the admissions arrangements complied with the law and were correctly applied and that the decision to refuse admission was a reasonable one in the circumstances. It therefore had no choice but to refuse Mrs X’s appeal.
15. Mrs X feels she was not offered the chance to talk about her child’s needs or to properly present her case. But the clerk’s notes show she was able to participate, including asking and answering questions, and that the panel fully considered the issues she raised. I appreciate Mrs X disagrees with the appeal panel’s decision but I have not seen enough evidence of fault to question it.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault for us to question the panel’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman