The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel’s failure to provide her child with a place at School Y. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault which caused them to lose out on a school place.
The complaint
Miss X, says the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel did not properly consider her appeal for a place for her child, Z, at School Y.
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 a 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) We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe: it is unlikely we would find fault, or the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council, which included the Appeal Panel papers.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Background information Miss X applied for her child Z to have a place at School Y immediately. The school year is full and the Council refused the application.
Miss X appealed for a place at School Y. Her reasons for appealing included: Z had friends attending School Y but not at their current school.
Z had a sibling at School Y.
Miss X says logistically it would be easier for her family.
Z would be able to attend after school activities which they cannot at their current school.
An Independent Appeal Panel considered her appeal remotely in April 2024.
The Appeal Panel decided not to award a place.
Miss X disagreed and complained to the Ombudsman. She feels her reasons she wants a place are strong and that they should far out weigh any prejudice caused to the school by adding one more child.
The appeal panel and our role Independent Appeal Panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. The panel must consider whether the: admission arrangements comply with the law; admission arrangements were properly applied to the case; and admission of another child would prejudice the education of others.
If the panel finds there would be prejudice the Panel must then consider each appellant’s individual arguments. If the Panel decides the appellant’s case outweighs the prejudice to the school, it must uphold the appeal. This means it can say a school is full but decide a child’s case is so compelling that it is more important to admit that child than prevent the detrimental effects to a school by having one more child.
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.
The Appeal Panel’s detailed decision letter records the reasons Miss X gave the appeal panel for wanting a place. The minutes of the hearing show the Appeal Panel actively considered the case.
It is unlikely we would find fault in the Appeal Panel’s decision based on the information I have seen which supports the appeal panel’s decision. It is clear from the papers the Appeal Panel gave careful and thorough consideration of Miss X’s case.
Final decision
The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault which caused Miss X the injustice she alleges.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman