Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault and so we cannot question the panel’s decision.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her daughter.

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 ther complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X was due to move into the Council’s area and applied for places at School B for her two daughters (Y and Z). The Council offered Y a place in Year 5. But because there were no places in Year 1, the Council refused Miss X’s application for Z. Miss X appealed the decision not to offer Z a place.
6. Independent school admission appeal panels must follow the law 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. There are special rules governing appeals for Reception and Years 1 and 2, where admitting another child would mean there would be more than 30 pupils per teacher. 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.
7. What is ‘unreasonable’ is a high test, and for it to be met, the panel would need to be sure the decision to refuse a place was ‘perverse’ or ‘outrageous’. For that reason, panels rarely find an admission authority’s decision to be unreasonable.
8. Infant class size appeals also apply to situations where admitting a further child would lead to a breach of the infant class size limit in future years. This applied to Miss X’s appeal. The school admits 15 children into Reception – taught in a single class. But the school mixes its Year 1 and 2 children together in a larger class. For the current year there are only 28 children in this class – fifteen Year 1 children and 13 Year 2 children. Next year, the 16 children in Reception will join the fifteen Year 1 children creating ‘future infant class size prejudice’. Miss X’s appeal was therefore governed by infant class size legislation.
9. In her written appeal, Miss X explained why she wanted Z to attend School B. She explained the logistical issues it would cause if Z could not attend the school with her sister. Miss X explained the impact it would have on her family and how it would make it hard for Miss X to complete a university cause.
10. The appeal was considered based on written submissions at Miss X’s request. The clerk’s notes show the panel followed the proper process to consider Miss X’s appeal. The panel decided the school’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel considered Miss X’s reasons for wanting a place. The panel decided it was not an unreasonable decision to refuse admission. The panel decided none of the grounds for allowing an infant class size appeal had been met. This is a decision the panel was entitled to reach. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.
11. I understand Miss X is unhappy her appeal was unsuccessful. But each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. As explained in paragraph 7, the threshold for an infant class size appeal to succeed is very high – and few do. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the panel decided Miss X’s appeal for the Ombudsman to become involved. An investigation is not therefore appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault and so we cannot question the merits of the panel’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman