Ombudsman issues reminder to two councils on recording of reasoning during school admission appeals

The Local Government and Social care Ombudsman has reminded Waltham Forest Council and East Riding of Yorkshire Council of the need to ensure that the reasons for school admission panel decisions are recorded.

In its investigation into Waltham Forest, the Ombudsman noted that the complainant, Ms X, had applied for a secondary school place for Child Y in October 2022.

In early March 2023, the council wrote to Ms X and said it had given Child Y a place at School 2 and not School 1, her preferred choice.

Ms X appealed to the council, which was the admission authority, and sought a place at School 1. The appeal took place in May 2023. Ms X’s appeal was unsuccessful.

The Ombudsman found that at stage 1 of the appeal, the clerk’s notes recorded the panel’s decision that prejudice would arise with the admission of more children.

However, there was no record of how the panel reached its decision and the reasons for the decision it made.

At the second stage of the appeal, the panel needed to consider whether Ms X’s case was stronger than School 1’s case.

Ms X explained she would find it hard to manage the journey to get Child Y to School 1 and her other children to a different school. “However, the clerk's notes make no reference to how the panel considered Ms X’s case”, said the Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman concluded that the clerk’s notes did not evidence that the panel properly considered Ms X’s reasons for wanting School 1 and how it reached its decision, which was fault.

To remedy the injustice caused, the Ombudsman recommended the council to:

• arrange a fresh appeal for Ms X with a new panel and clerk; and
• remind all clerking staff of the need to clearly record how the panel reached its decisions and the reasons for the decisions at both stages of the appeal process.

In the Ombudsman’s investigation into East Riding of Yorkshire Council, the regulator found “some fault” in how its independent appeal panel considered a father’s appeals for places for his children at their preferred secondary school.

Mr D told the Ombudsman the panel failed to evidence its decision making and explain why his appeals were rejected. He also said panel members “inappropriately questioned his wife on her work”.

The Ombudsman investigated and concluded that the clerk’s stage one notes did not show how the panel decided the admission arrangements were lawful, properly applied and the reasons why it was satisfied, which was fault.

The Ombudsman added: “The clerk’s stage two notes show some consideration of the points Mr D raised. However, this is not reflected in the decision letters. The decision letters list Mr D’s key arguments, but there is no explanation of why they were not sufficient to override prejudice to School Y.”

Following the investigation, the report noted that the council had agreed to:

• Apologise to Mr D for the uncertainty caused by how it considered his appeals.
• Arrange for Mr D’s appeals to be re-heard with a new panel and clerk.

Further, the council agreed to issue written reminders to clerks to ensure they record the reasons for the panel’s decision at both stages of the school admissions appeals process and they provide detailed explanations to parents/guardians in the decision letters.

Waltham Forest Council and East Riding of Yorkshire Council have been approached for comment.

Lottie Winson