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 for us to be able to question the panel’s decision.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her son.

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 this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Mrs X applied for her son (Y) to join Year 2 at her preferred school (School Z). Because there were no places available in Year 2, the Council refused Mrs X’s application. Mrs X appealed the decision not to offer Y a place.

The appeals process

6. Independent appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. They need to consider if the school’s admission arrangements comply with the law, and if they were properly applied to the appellant’s application. They need to decide if admitting a further child would “prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources”. If they think it would, they need to consider if an appellant’s arguments outweigh the prejudice to the school.

Mrs X’s appeal

7. The clerk’s notes show the Council and Mrs X had the chance to present their cases. In her appeal, Mrs X explained why she wanted Y to attend School Z. Mrs X explained she was due to move to a house close to the school. Y was also being bullied at School Z. Mrs X explained Y had friends at School Z. The panel asked questions.
8. The panel considered information about School Z. The panel decided its admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. School Z’s Published Admission Number of 25 had been reached. The panel decided admitting a further child would cause prejudice. The panel decided by a majority vote the evidence put forward in support of Mrs X’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting a further child would cause School Z. The panel refused Mrs X’s appeal. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.

Assessment

9. I understand Mrs X is unhappy her appeal was unsuccessful. But we are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions which were properly taken.
10. Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider and decide Mrs X’s appeal. The panel reached a decision it was entitled to. I have not seen any evidence the panel did not properly consider the appeal.
11. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the panel decided Mrs X’s appeal for the Ombudsman to become involved. An investigation is not therefore appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman