The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complained about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place.
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 Mrs X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and information from the Council. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
What I found
Mrs X moved address and applied to the Council for a Year 7 place at her preferred school (School Z) for her son (Y). Because the school was already full in Year 7 the Council did not offer Y a place. Mrs X appealed the decision. In her written appeal Mrs X explained why she wanted Y to attend the school. This included the problems Y would have travelling to his previous school, and the alternative schools the Council could offer Y a place at.
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.
The clerk’s notes from the appeal show that: The panel decided the school’s admission arrangements complied with the law and had been properly applied to Mrs X’s application.
Mrs X had the opportunity to present her case.
The panel asked questions.
The panel considered the information Mrs X had sent supporting her appeal.
The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Mrs X’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting a further child would cause the school.
The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.
I understand Mrs X is disappointed with the panel’s decision. But we are not an appeal body, and we cannot criticise decisions taken without fault.
The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider the appeal. The panel considered the information provided by Mrs X and the school. It is for the panel to decide what weight should be given to each piece of evidence. The decision to refuse the appeal is one the panel was entitled to take.
Mrs X has questioned if the panel properly understood her situation, as the decision letter wrongly referred to her daughter attending a school in Halifax. This point was not a key part of the panel’s decision making. But the notes I have seen show the panel fully understood the logistical problems faced by Mrs X.
Without evidence of fault in the decision-making process there are no grounds for us to become involved. That is the case here and so we will not start an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman