Local Government Ombudsman finds school admission appeals process flawed

The Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) has warned councils to carefully consider their appeals processes after a complainant waited over five months to receive a fresh school admission appeal, despite being asked to do so by the LGO.

The complainant, Mrs W, originally complained to the Ombudsman that a Warwickshire County Council appeal panel failed to consider whether the primary school that she wanted her daughter to attend was full.

The Ombudsman agreed with her claim, finding that the council's appeal panel spent less than five minutes deciding whether the primary school that the complainant wanted her daughter to attend was full. The Ombudsman further found that the clerk’s notes of its discussion referred only to the published admission number having been reached and the school being underfunded.

The LGO suggested to the Council that a fresh appeal would remedy the injustice of the first, flawed appeal. However, the council resisted a fresh appeal, resulting in a five month delay in the appeal being heard.

In her report into the complaint against Warwickshire County Council, the Local Government Ombudsman, Anne Seex said it was maladministration for the Panel not to properly consider whether the council had established that admitting more children would prejudice efficient education or use of resources, as required by the statutory School Admissions Appeal Code.

“It is most regrettable that the Council’s resistance caused the complainant and her daughter to have to wait more than five months before being offered a remedy for the injustice caused to them,” Ms Seex said. “I hope that the Council will reflect on the consequences of its stance both for the complainant and for the effective use of its and my resources.”

The statutory School Admissions Appeal Code says that an appeal panel must consider whether admitting an additional child to a school would prejudice the effective education of other children or effective use of resources. An appeal panel must consider a number of factors and cannot rely only on the school having reached its published admissions number. Clerks of appeal panels are required to make complete and accurate records of a hearing.

The Ombudsman found that the Appeal Panel spent less than five minutes deciding the issue and the Clerk’s notes of its discussion refer only to the published admission number having been reached and the School being underfunded. The notes of a discussion at a later part of the hearing indicated that at least one Panel member doubted that admitting one more child prejudiced the education of others.

On examining the Clerk’s notes, the Ombudsman suggested to the Council that there were strong indications of maladministration and that it would be in the interests of justice and effective use of public resources for her to discontinue her investigation and for it to offer Mrs W a fresh appeal. The Council resisted this suggestion for some time, causing Mrs W to wait more than five months before being offered a fresh appeal to remedy the injustice of her first, flawed appeal. As the child had by then settled into her new school, Mrs W declined.

To obtain a copy of the report please click here.