The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful school admission appeal. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to be able to question its decision.
The complaint
Miss X complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her daughter. Miss X said the panel failed to properly consider her appeal.
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
Miss X applied for her daughter (Y) to start Year 7 in September 2024 at her preferred school (School Z). Because there were more applications than places available, the Council used School Z’s oversubscription criteria to decide which children it would offer a place. The Council did not offer Y a place at School Z and Miss X appealed the decision.
The appeals process 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.
Miss X’s appeal The clerk’s notes show the Council’s representative presented their case. They explained how the Council had dealt with Miss X’s application and why it had not offered Y a place at School Z. They explained the difficulties offering a place would cause. The panel and parents could ask questions.
Miss X presented her case and explained why she wanted a place at School Z. She questioned why the Council had offered other children places at School Z despite them living further away. Miss X queried why the Council asked about the primary school Y attended if it was not taken into account. Miss X said the Council had not considered the logistical issues of refusing her application or that Y’s friendship group would be transferring to School Z. Miss X provided information in support of her appeal including a letter from a social worker.
The panel decided School Z’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel decided admitting a further child would cause School Z prejudice. The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Miss X’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting Y would cause School Z. The panel refused the appeal. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.
Assessment I understand Miss X is unhappy the appeal was unsuccessful. But we are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions when the proper process was followed, and decisions 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 Miss X’s appeal.
Based on the evidence available the panel considered all the information before it and reached a decision it was entitled to. It took into account information presented by School Z and Miss X. It decided there were no errors in how the Council dealt with Miss X’s application and that School Z’s admission arrangements had been properly applied. The panel considered the issue of prejudice and the tests required by the School Admission Appeals Code.
Miss X says her appeal was not heard in time. But this does not undermine the panel’s decision.
I have not seen enough evidence the panel did not properly consider the appeal to warrant an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman