Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s School Admissions Appeal Panel’s handling of her appeal against the refusal to offer her child a place at her preferred school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault affecting the panel’s decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains the Council’s School Admissions Appeal Panel did not properly consider her appeal for a reception place at her preferred school (School Y) for her child, Z.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X applied on-time for a place for Z in reception at School Y from September 2024.
6. School Y had more applications than spaces available so the Council allocated places at the school according to its admissions criteria. Mrs X’s application for Z was considered under the “sibling” category but Mrs X believes the category should have been given higher priority. She also complains the Council’s Appeal Panel did not tell her what would happen after it made a decision and that it refused to tell her the reason for upholding other appeals.

The appeals process

7. Independent appeal panels must follow the School Admissions Appeals Code 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.
8. When a school receives more applications than it has places (the ‘published admissions number’, or PAN), the applications will be ranked according to its over-subscription criteria. Each application will be placed into the highest appropriate criterion, and places are then allocated in descending order of rank.
9. If a child is not allocated a place in their preferred school they may appeal. There are special rules governing appeals for reception and Years 1 and 2. Appeals under these rules are known as “infant class size appeals”. 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.
10. An appeal panel can only overturn an admissions authority’s decision to refuse a place if they find one or more of these points do not apply and that had the decision been taken properly, the child would have been allocated a place at the school.
11. What is ‘reasonable’ is a high test. The panel needs to be sure that to refuse a place was “perverse” or “outrageous”. For that reason, panels rarely find an admission authority’s decision to be unreasonable in light of the admission arrangements.
12. The clerk must ensure an accurate record is taken of the points raised at the hearing, including the proceedings, attendance, voting, and reasons for decisions.

Analysis

13. Our role is to check appeals have been carried out properly. We do not provide a further right of appeal or decide whether a child should be given a place at a school and we cannot question the merits of decisions 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.
14. The evidence available in this case shows the Council as the admissions authority wrote to Mrs X to explain the reasons it refused her application for a place for Z at School Y. It sent her a copy of the school’s case explaining how spaces had been allocated, that they were allocated in accordance with their admissions arrangements and that the school was full.
15. Mrs X appealed against the Council’s decision explaining Z had mental health issues and would not cope at another school. She also said she would find it difficult to get Z to School Y as she had another child attending the same school.
16. The panel considered Mrs X’s appeal but found that admitting Z to the school would breach the infant class size limit, that the admissions arrangements complied with the law and were correctly applied and that the decision to refuse admission was a reasonable one in the circumstances. It therefore had no choice but to refuse Mrs X’s appeal.
17. I appreciate Mrs X disagrees with the appeal panel’s decision but I have not seen enough evidence of fault to question it.
18. While Mrs X says she does not believe the panel listened to what she had to say it is clear it did. It had sympathy for Z but it could not use this as a reason to uphold the appeal. The clerk’s notes show parents were given the opportunity to ask questions and while Mrs X is unhappy the Council refused to tell her why it had upheld other appeals this is not relevant to her case. The question for us is whether the panel properly considered Mrs X’s appeal and the evidence shows it did. They also show Mrs X was advised she would receive written confirmation of the decision on her case within five school days. The decision letter set out the points the panel considered from the school/admissions authority’s case and Mrs X’s but explain the reasons why it decided to refuse the appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

19. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman