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

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains about an unsuccessful appeal for a place for her son Y at her preferred school, School Z. She is unhappy the independent school admissions panel accepted her son had exceptional circumstances but did not offer him a place at the school.

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

Back to top

Background

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. These are called excepted pupils.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. We cannot question the decision if it has been 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.
9. 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.
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

My assessment

11. The Ombudsman’s 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.
12. The Council refused Mrs X’s application for a place for Y at School Z because the school was oversubscribed and Y lived further away than the last child allocated a place. Mrs X appealed against the decision as she did not want to send him to the school offered and because School Z was closer to his grandmother, with whom he spends a lot of time.
13. Mrs X’s complaint is based on the fact the panel accepted Y had exceptional circumstances and did not offer him a place at School Z, but this is not the test. The panel could only overturn the original decision if it found the decision the infant class size limit had not been breached, the admissions arrangements were unlawful or not properly applied, or if the decision was unreasonable. The Council’s records from the appeal hearing shows the panel considered the relevant points along with the arguments put forward by Mrs X, as required. It was satisfied the decision was not subject to challenge on any of the relevant points and it therefore had no alternative but to refuse the appeal.
14. I have seen no evidence of fault in its consideration of these issues and we cannot therefore question its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman