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
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her daughter. Miss X is unhappy with how the Council dealt with her application for a place which she made from overseas.
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.
What I found
Miss X applied for her daughter (Y) to start year 7 at her preferred school (School Z) in September 2024. At the time of applying, Miss X and her family lived overseas. They would be relocating to the Council’s area in August 2024.
The Council processed Miss X’s application as part of the normal admissions round. But because they did not meet the Council’s published requirements, it did not use the address they would be moving to when assigning an oversubscription criterion to Y’s application. These criteria are used to decide which children the Council will offer a place if a school receives more applications than places available.
School Z was oversubscribed and the Council did not offer Y a place. Miss X appealed the decision.
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.
Miss X’s appeal The clerk’s notes show the school and Council’s representatives presented their case. They explained how the Council had dealt with Miss X’s application and why it had not offered Y a place. They explained the difficulties offering a place would cause. The panel and parents could ask questions. The panel asked the Council to comment on Government guidance cited by Miss X. This states applications from overseas should be included within the Council’s coordinated scheme. The Council explained it had processed the application but could not use the new address without the relevant proof. The Council would update Y’s oversubscription criterion once the family moved.
Miss X presented her case and explained why she wanted a place at School Z. She explained her concerns about the school offered. Miss X explained the difficulties it would cause if the panel did not offer Y a place.
The panel decided School Z’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. This included how the Council had dealt with Miss X’s application made from overseas. The panel decided admitting a further child would cause School Z prejudice. The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Miss X’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting Y would cause School Z. The panel refused the appeal. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.
Assessment I understand Miss X is unhappy the 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.
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 the appeal.
The panel considered all the information before it and reached a decision it was entitled to. It took into account information presented by School Z and Miss X. I have not seen enough evidence the panel did not properly consider the appeal to warrant an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault for us to be able to question the panel’s decision.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman