The Ombudsman's final decision
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 for us to question the merits of the panel’s decision.
The complaint
Mrs X complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her son.
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 information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Background
Mrs X’s family moved into the Council’s area in February 2022. Mrs X made an in-year application for a year 1 place at her preferred school (School Z) for her son (Y). Because there were no places in year 1, the Council refused her application. In line with its coordinated admissions scheme, the Council offered a place at the closest school with a vacancy (School B). Miss X declined the offer of a place at School B and Y continued at his current school.
In May 2022, a place became available at School C. Mrs X thought the journey to School C would be easier than to Y’s current school and she accepted the place. Because the journey proved harder than expected, Mrs X appealed the decision not to offer Y a place at her original first choice, School Z.
The appeals process 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”. Infant class size legislation applied to Miss X’s appeal.
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.
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.
Miss X’s appeal The clerk’s notes show the Council and Mrs X had the chance to present their cases. In her written appeal and at the hearing Mrs X explained why she wanted Y to attend School Z. She explained her younger child would be starting at School Z in September. There were logistical issues from having children at two different schools. Mrs X explained why she had turned down the school the Council had originally offered.
The panel considered information about School Z. The panel decided its admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel decided admitting a further child would breach the infant class size limit. The panel decided it was not an unreasonable decision to refuse admission. None of the grounds for allowing an infant class size appeal had been met and so the panel refused Mrs X’s appeal. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.
Assessment 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.
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 considered the information Mrs X and the Council presented.
Mrs X has questioned if the panel properly considered the fact Y’s sibling had been offered a place at School Z. I note the clerk’s letter states the Council would amend Y’s place on School Z’s waiting list once his sibling was on the school’s roll. That is not correct. The Council’s coordinated admissions scheme states that for a mid-year application, a sibling is a child with a brother or sister who “attends or has been offered a place at the preferred school.”
I do not therefore see why the sibling connection would not already apply. However, I do not consider this point to undermine the panel’s decision making as a whole. The notes and decision letter clearly show the panel were aware the Council had offered Y’s sibling a place at School Z. Also, panels cannot consider a child’s position on a waiting list when deciding an appeal. Y’s position on the waiting list would only therefore be relevant if a place became available.
Mrs X is also concerned if accepting a place at School C disadvantaged her as it meant Y had a place in a local school. But the Council had originally offered Y a place at School B. This meant there were no grounds for considering Y under the Council’s Fair Access Protocol. The place at School C did not change this. The panel considered this point as part of Mrs X’s appeal.
The panel considered Mrs X’s reasons for wanting a place but decided the high threshold for an infant class size appeal to succeed had not been met. That is a decision the panel was entitled to reach.
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.
The Council has accepted a further application from Mrs X for a place at School Z which it also refused. This has triggered a fresh right of appeal. If Mrs X’s appeal is unsuccessful she can make a fresh complaint to the Ombudsman.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs 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.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman