The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complained about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and information from the Council. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
What I found
Mr X’s family has recently moved to the country. Mr X applied for places at School Z for his two children. The Council offered one of the children a place. But because there were no places in Year 3, the Council refused Mr X’s application for his other child (Y). He appealed the decision not to offer Y a place.
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.
The clerk’s notes from the hearing show the Council presented its case. The Council explained what difficulties it thought would be caused by offering Y a place. The clerk’s notes show the panel asked questions.
The clerk’s notes also show that: The panel decided the school’s admission arrangements complied with the law and had been properly applied to the application.
The panel decided admitting further children would cause prejudice.
Mr X had the opportunity to present his case.
The panel considered the information Mr X had sent supporting his appeal. This included why he wanted his children to attend the same school.
The panel considered information about other schools with spaces.
The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Mr X’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting a further child would cause the school.
The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.
I understand Mr X is disappointed with the panel’s decision. But we are not an appeal body, and we cannot criticise decisions taken without fault.
The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider the appeal. The panel considered the information provided by Mr X and the Council. It is for the panel to decide what weight should be given to each piece of evidence. The decision to refuse the appeal is one the panel was entitled to take.
Without evidence of fault in the decision-making process there are no grounds for us to become involved. That is the case here and so we will not start an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman