The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.
The complaint
Ms X complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her daughter. Ms X is unhappy the appeal was held over the telephone and a representative from the school did not attend. Ms X says the Council’s representative could not answer certain questions. She says she did not receive signed copies of the data used in support of the school’s case. Ms X says the panel failed to properly consider her appeal.
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 information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Background
Ms X applied for her daughter (Y) to transfer schools. Ms X wanted Y to transfer to Year 7 in School Z. Because there were no places available in School Z, the Council refused Ms X’s application. Ms X appealed the decision not to offer Y a place.
The appeals process 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.
Ms X’s appeal The clerk’s notes show the school and Ms X had the chance to present their cases. In her appeal, Ms X explained why she wanted Y to attend School Z. She set out the difficulties Y had with her current school. Ms X explained the advantages School Z would offer.
The panel considered information about School Z. The panel decided its admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel decided admitting a further child would cause prejudice. The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Ms X’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting a further child would cause School Z. The panel refused Ms X’s appeal. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.
Assessment I understand Ms X is unhappy her appeal was unsuccessful. But we are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions when the proper process was followed and decisions were properly taken.
Temporary regulations introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic allowed admission authorities to hold appeals in various ways. This included appeals over the telephone. I have not seen any evidence this approach meant Ms X could not take part in the process.
Admission authorities are required to send a presenting officer to appeals. In this case the Council is the admission authority and a council officer attended. It was not fault for a representative of the school to not attend.
The presenting officer is there to explain the reasons for refusing admission and to answer questions. Ms X says the presenting officer could not answer some of the questions asked. But it does not follow this disadvantaged Ms X. Also, it is our role to consider how the panel considered the appeal – not the actions of the presenting officer.
There is no requirement for appellants to receive signed copies of data used in their appeal. But the hearing is an opportunity for all parties to explore the data provided.
Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider and decide Ms X’s appeal. The panel reached a decision it was entitled to. I have not seen enough evidence the panel did not properly consider the appeal to warrant an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman