Summary: Mr X complained that the Council’s school admissions appeal panel did not properly consider his appeal for a place for his child at his preferred secondary school. We found no fault by the appeal panel. However, we found the Council was at fault in that its website did not clearly explain the boundary of the school’s catchment area. This did not cause Mr X an injustice, but the Council has agreed to make the information on its website clearer for the benefit of future applicants.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel did not properly consider his appeal for a place for his child at his preferred secondary school. He says the panel lacked diversity and panel members showed a lack of impartiality, disregarded important arguments, and displayed a patronising attitude. He also says the clerk failed to inform unsuccessful applicants of the outcome of the hearing. He says this has caused him distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ in this statement I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. The Ombudsman cannot question a school admission appeal panel’s decision simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider if there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3))
3. We check the Independent Appeal Panel followed the Code of Practice issued by the Department for Education and the hearing was fair. We do this by examining the notes taken by the Clerk during the hearing. We do not have the power to overturn the Panel’s decision, and we cannot give a child a place at the school. If we find fault which calls the Panel’s decision into question we may ask for a new appeal hearing.
4. If we are satisfied with a panel’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
5. We cannot investigate most complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(2), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have considered:
• Mr X’s comments;
• the information presented to the appeal panels, the clerks’ notes of the appeal hearings and the decision letters following the appeals; and
• the current School Admissions Code and School Admission Appeals Code.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Admission arrangements

8. The school is a community school. The Council is the admission authority and is responsible for admissions and appeals. The admissions authority has to publish its admission arrangements including the way it determines priority if there are too many applications for the available places.
9. It is a matter for the admissions authority to determine what the priority criteria are. It is free to set whatever criteria it likes, provided these are lawful and that it properly considers Government guidance.
10. When considering applications for admission, the Council must work on the basis of the published admission arrangements.
11. The Council applied the following criteria to allocate the places available:
1. looked after children;
2. children of all school staff;
3. children who live in the catchment area and have a sibling currently on roll at the school who will continue to attend that school in the following academic year;
4. other children who live in the catchment area;
5. children who have siblings who are currently on roll at the school and will continue to attend that school in the following academic year; and
6. children who live out of the catchment area who have no sibling attending the school.
12. Mr X applied for a place at the school for his son, S. His application was placed in category f as he lives outside the school’s catchment area and S does not have any siblings at the school. Mr X’s application was unsuccessful because all places had been allocated.
13. Parents who were not offered a place had the right to appeal to an independent appeal panel.

The appeal

14. Mr X says the panel lacked diversity. The Council has explained that it recruits panel members, who are volunteers, throughout the year. The members required to sit on appeals for School Y needed to be available for four full days and this commitment of time does not suit all members. It is not always possible to have diversity in panel members given that they are volunteers so, I find no fault in this regard.
15. The Code sets out the process the independent appeal panel must follow when considering an appeal.
16. The panel must first consider whether the admission arrangements complied with the law and whether they were correctly applied. Mr X’s application was unsuccessful because there were more applications than places at the school and all the places were filled by children who had more priority according to the school’s oversubscription criteria. The Panel was satisfied the admission criteria complied with the law and were correctly applied and I have seen no evidence to suggest this was not the case.
17. The panel must then consider whether the admission of an additional child or children would prejudice efficient education or the efficient use of resources at the school.
18. The school submitted a detailed written case to explain why it could not accept more pupils. Parents and panel members had an opportunity to submit questions about the school’s case.
19. One of the questions asked by a panel member was about catchment areas. She asked, “there is a query about where lines actually are, very often lines go down the middle of streets?”. The school’s representative said, “that is correct, one street is [School X] and one side is [School Y] for example”.
20. The Panel decided the school was full and could not admit any more pupils without disadvantaging existing pupils.
21. The panel must then consider each appellant’s case. For each individual appeal it must assess whether that child’s needs are so exceptional that they should override the prejudice to the school of admitting an additional pupil. This is known as the balancing stage and is a matter for the panel’s judgement considering all the available information.
22. At the hearing Mr X put forward his case for S to be admitted to the school and answered questions put by the panel. The clerk’s notes and the appeal papers clearly record Mr X’s case and his discussions with the panel at the hearing. I have not repeated the details here to ensure his anonymity.
23. Mr X says panel members showed a lack of impartiality and displayed a patronising attitude. Having considered the detailed notes of the hearing, I have seen no evidence to suggest this was the case. The panel gave Mr X the opportunity to read his written statement even though he had submitted it late. They then asked questions of Mr X. Panel members are entitled to ask detailed questions to satisfy themselves as to the reasons why Mr X wanted a place at the school and what the family’s circumstances were.
24. After hearing from Mr X, the panel discussed the case. Mr X says the panel disregarded important arguments. But the clerk’s notes show the panel considered the arguments he put forward.
25. The panel noted that the family live outside the catchment area of School Y. It considered all the points raised by Mr X in his written and verbal submissions. It noted Mr X’s arguments that the Code had not been properly complied with and that the map on the school’s website suggested his address was in the catchment area.
26. During the hearing, Mr X said the map on the school’s website showed his address was within the catchment area, but the school’s representative explained that the boundary of the catchment area is in the centre of Mr X’s Road. Mr X argued that the catchment line was misleading and, if the panel accepted his side of the road was outside the catchment area, the Code had not been correctly and impartially applied.
27. The notes of the panel’s decision-making state, “panel considered carefully the assertions made by the appellant with regard to the Appeals Code for stage 1 and 2 and catchment map. However, the panel did not agree with the assertions and considered that the admissions criteria were applied properly and impartially for all applicants”. The panel decided Mr X’s case did not outweigh the prejudice to the school of admitting another pupil because there were no exceptional extenuating circumstances and the school offered to S was within a reasonable distance of the family home.
28. Following the appeal hearing, the clerk wrote to Mr X explaining the panel’s decision. The Code says that the clerk’s letter explaining the panel’s decision must contain a summary of relevant factors that were raised by the parties and considered by the panel and must give clear reasons for the panel’s decision. I am satisfied that was the case here.
29. Mr X says the clerk failed to inform unsuccessful applicants of the outcome of the hearing and he did not find out the result until three weeks later when he received the clerk’s letter. The Council has explained that all parents are advised that, 'if they are successful they will receive a phone call on a specific date between 10am and 11am, in the absence of a call unfortunately the appeal has been unsuccessful but a letter will follow with the reasons in both instances'. Mr X should therefore have been aware that his appeal had been unsuccessful as he did not receive a telephone call.
30. In conclusion, I am satisfied the panel properly considered Mr X’s case. As there was no fault in the process, I cannot question its decision to refuse the appeal.

The Council’s website

31. The catchment area map on the school’s website is the same as that on the Council’s website. It shows the boundary of the catchment area runs along Mr X’s Road. Neither the school’s website nor that of the Council explain that, where the boundary line runs along a road, properties on one side of the road fall within the catchment area of one school and properties on the other side of the road are in the catchment area of another school.
32. The Council’s website should clearly explain the position in relation to catchment boundaries. I do not consider the failure to do so caused Mr X an injustice because he did not rely on this information but, instead, relied on the same information on the school’s website.
33. I cannot recommend that the school amends its website, as we have no jurisdiction in respect of the internal management of schools. However, I consider the information on the Council’s website is potentially misleading to other applicants. So, I made recommendations in relation to this.

Back to top

Agreed action

34. The Council has agreed that, within one month, it will amend the information on its website to make it clearer that, where an applicant lives along the line of the catchment boundary, properties on one side of the road fall within the catchment area of one school and those on the other side are in the catchment area of another school.
35. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

36. I do not uphold Mr X’s complaint.
37. However, I find the Council was at fault in that the information on its website was not clear in relation to catchment boundaries.
38. I have completed my investigation on the basis that the Council has agreed to complete the agreed action.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman