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 to warrant further investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains the Council’s School Admissions Appeal Panel did not properly consider her appeal for Year 7 place for her daughter, Y, at her preferred school (School Z). She says the Council did not give her sufficient notice of the appeal hearing and focused more on the financial side of the school’s argument than her reasons for appealing.

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)
3. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

Background

6. Mrs X applied on-time for a place for Y in Year 7 at School Z from September 2024.
7. School Z had far more applications than spaces available so the Council allocated places at the school according to its oversubscription criteria. Mrs X and Y ranked lower than other applicants so the school did not offer Y a place. Mrs X appealed against the decision but could not attend the original hearing date. The Council told Mrs X she would have to wait until September for a new hearing but then contacted her and offered her one within a few days. She accepted the Council’s offer as she wanted to resolve the issue as soon as possible.

The appeals process

8. Independent appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. They need to consider if the school’s admissions arrangements comply with the law, and if they were properly and impartially applied to the appellant’s application. They also 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.
9. 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

10. 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.
11. The evidence available in this case shows the Council as the admissions authority considered Mrs X’s application against the oversubscription criteria and allocated Y a place at the closest available school. When she appealed, the Council 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.
12. Mrs X appealed against the Council’s decision on the basis she had another child at the school and that the school was best placed to meet Y’s needs. She explained she could not drop Y at a different school or pick her up on time due to her personal circumstances and did not believe she should have to rely on others to do this for her.
13. The panel considered Mrs X’s appeal but accepted the argument that admitting Y to the school would prejudice the provision of efficient education and the efficient use of resources. The panel was satisfied the admissions arrangements complied with the law and were correctly and impartially applied in Y’s case. It then considered Mrs X’s reasons for wanting Y to attend School Z and balanced these against the prejudice to the school from admitting another pupil. It found there was nothing significant enough to outweigh the prejudice to the school, so it refused Mrs X’s appeal. The Council then wrote to Mrs X setting out the decision and the panel’s reasons.
14. I appreciate Mrs X disagrees with the appeal panel’s decision but I have not seen enough evidence of fault for us to question it. The panel properly considered the concerns Mrs X put forward and her reasons for wanting Y to attend School Z and reached a decision it was entitled to reach.
15. Mrs X considers she did not have enough time to prepare her appeal but she set out the grounds of her appeal in her initial submission and provided further information more than a week before the date of the hearing. She then had the opportunity to speak to the panel in detail at the hearing and confirmed she had said everything she wanted to before it made its decision. Had Mrs X felt the date for the appeal hearing was too soon she could have refused it and asked for more time, but I have not seen anything which suggests she would have provided anything which would have changed the outcome of her appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the panel considered Mrs X’s appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman