Summary: Mr D complained how the independent appeal panel dealt with his appeal for a place for his son at his preferred secondary school. We find some fault in how the panel handled Mr D’s appeal. This means he cannot be satisfied the process was carried out fairly. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

The complaint

1. Mr D complained how the independent appeal panel dealt with his appeal for a place for his son at his preferred secondary school. He says the panel did not fully consider the severity of his circumstances and he was not given an opportunity to have support during the hearing.
2. Mr D says the matter has caused distress and upset to his family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information from Mr D and the Council.
6. Mr D 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

Legal and administrative background

7. Statutory guidance about school admissions and appeals can be found in The School Admissions Code and School Admission Appeals Code. Both are published by the Department for Education.
8. Parents/carers have the right to appeal an admission authority’s decision not to offer their child a school place.
9. Appeals must be held in private and conducted in the presence of all panel members and parties. The admission authority must provide a presenting officer at the hearing to present the decision not to admit the child and to answer questions about the school’s case.
10. Panels must follow a two-stage decision making process. 
11. Stage 1: the panel examines the decision to refuse admission. The panel must consider whether: 

• The admissions arrangements complied with the mandatory requirements set out in the School Admissions Code; 
• The admission arrangements were applied correctly; and if 
• The admission of additional children would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.  

12. If a panel decides that admitting further children would “prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources” they move to the second stage two of the process.
13. Stage 2: balancing the arguments. The panel must balance the prejudice to the school against the appellant’s case for the child to be admitted.
14. The clerk must take an accurate record of the hearing, including the proceedings, attendance, voting and reasons for decisions.
15. The appeal panel must write to the appellant, the admission authority and the council with its decision and the reasons for it. The decision letter must be easy to understand and must contain a summary of relevant factors raised by parties and considered by the panel. It must also provide clear reasons for the panel’s decision.

What happened

16. Mr D applied for his son (E) to attend his preferred secondary school (School Y). However, he was allocated a place at another school (School Z).
17. Mr D appealed. He said E is a high achiever and School Y was the only school that could meet his needs. He also said School Z is over four miles away from his house in the wrong direction, whereas School Y is much closer. He said he takes his younger children to school, and it was not possible to get E to School Z on time. Mr D provided letters from E’s primary school and the social care department from his home authority in support of his appeal.
18. The Council invited Mr D to a hearing. It said if he had any special requirements, he should contact the named officer.
19. An independent appeal panel considered Mr D’s case. School Y said it was oversubscribed, and admitting further children would prejudice the effective education of existing pupils and lead to further demand on staff. The panel decided there were serious overcrowding issues in School Y and significant pressures on staff. It said School Y had proved its case.
20. The panel then considered Mr D’s case. Mr D explained his family circumstances and his wife’s physical and mental health issues. He said the family would struggle financially if E went to School Z. The panel decided there were no compelling reasons why E should attend School Y. Members said Mr D should consider applying to other schools.
21. The clerk issued a decision letter after the hearing. The letter states the panel was satisfied the admission authority had properly implemented its own published admissions arrangements and they were compliant with the law. The letter also says the panel considered Mr D’s reasons for choosing School Y, but they did not outweigh the stage one decision.

Back to top

Analysis

22. Mr D says he was not given an opportunity to have support during the hearing. However, the letter from the Council inviting Mr D to the hearing states he should contact the named officer if he had any special requirements. Therefore, I do not uphold this part of Mr D’s complaint.
23. I have considered whether the panel considered Mr D’s appeal in line with the School Admissions Appeals Code. The clerk’s stage one notes state School Y proved its case. However, there is nothing in the notes about the admissions arrangements and whether they were compliant with the law. This is fault. The decision letter states the panel was satisfied the admission authority had properly implemented its own published admissions arrangements and they were compliant with the law. However, this is not reflected in the clerk’s notes, and so I cannot be satisfied the panel considered these points.
24. The clerk’s stage two notes are brief on the decision making and why the panel decided Mr D had not demonstrated a strong enough case to outweigh the prejudice to School Y. The decision letter sets out the points Mr D raised during the hearing, but it also does not give a detailed explanation why the panel rejected his appeal.
25. The faults identified call into question the decision reached. This has caused Mr D an injustice as he cannot be certain his appeal was properly considered.

Back to top

Agreed action

26. By 5 January 2024 the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Mr D for the uncertainty caused by how it considered his appeal.
• Arrange for Mr D’s appeal to be re-heard with a new panel and clerk. The appeal should be considered based on the admission figures at the time Mr D made his first appeal. This is to ensure Mr D is put back in the position he would have been in had his appeal been properly considered.

27. By 2 February 2024 the Council has agreed to:

• Issue written reminders to clerks to ensure they record the reasons for the panel’s decision at both stages of the school admissions appeals process and they provide detailed explanations to parents/guardians in the decision letters.

28. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

29. There was fault by the Council, which has caused Mr D an injustice. The Council has accepted my recommendations and so I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman