Appeal school has PAN of 45 and predjudice of 50......please explain?

[Winksclub76]

Hi,
Please could someone help me understand what LEA office has told me. I am planning to appeal to my first choice school (did not get into any of my choices and allocated a very poorly performing school).

The printed planned admission number is 45. The applications for places went as follows 1st choice 50, 2nd 68 and 3rd 55 (siblings 17). In the criteria siblings come before distance and the last place allocated was 0.61 miles, we were 0.65 miles (missing by about 64 metres! grrr)

LEA office has told me the predjudice for the places is 50 and I was 48th on the list for places. Am I wrong to think I should have been given one of the 5 places. Can I use this rationale as part of my appeal?? It almost looks like the school has saved 5 places for appeals.

Thankyou for reading.....would appreciate any feedback.

No idea what they mean about the prejudice for the places being 50. Very strange statement. They will have offered 45 places and, as you were 48th on the list for admission, you missed out.

I don't think they have saved 5 places for appeals. With an admission number of 45 I would expect to find 2 classes in Reception and 3 mixed classes covering Y1 and Y2. If that is the way this school is organised any appeal will be an infant class size case which means you should only win if you can show that a mistake has been made and your child should have been given a place.

If the class organisation is different it may not be an infant class size appeal. It would be unusual but it does happen. So you do need to check how classes are organised in infants in this school.

Thanks for your reply.
I appreciate your advice....I have been following/reading posts on appeals for days and noticed your strong presence.

I, like you, doubted the pedjudice to 50 statement and have phoned back over several days to see what other admission office staff say. Each time I get the same response and they also state it is not a class size appeal. Yet no-one has been able to explain it yet. The reception class is 30 and then they operate mixed classes through the rest of the school. The reamainig 15 reception (out of 45) are mixed with year 1. There are currently 307 on roll Jan 11. Does this add up, I don't really know how to work it out?

Do you think I can bring these points up in my appeal?
Thanks

Sorry, should have added they also have a complete class of 30 of each year in the rest of school.

OK, so they are operating with a single reception class of 30, a class which will be 15 reception children and 15 year1 children, plus a year 1 class of 30. I would then assume that they have 3 classes of 30 between year2/3 and upwards through the school. It is not the usual system that is operated (PRH has given that) but every school makes their own decisions.)
If the school was full with 45 in each year group then they would have 7 x 45 = 315 in the school, so the 307 does seem reasonable and that in most year groups they are either full or nearly full.
What I can say is that this is definitely an infant class size case on the information posted and the admission office people do not know what they are talking about. I also have absolutely no idea what this is term prejudice for the places means. Maybe it it would a good idea to email the admission office and ask for the meaning of it and see what you get back. Alternatively PM me the LA and I will look at the LA literature and see if I can work out what it is.
If it is in any way implying that they could take 50 but only allocate 45 to start with, that is illegal and should be a basis for a successful appeal if you were 48th on the list.

Thankyou admission,
I have regularly followed your responses too.

Yes, your calculations and what you have said make sense.

I have the name of the admission team manager (in attempt to get organ grinder not the monkey....) and have tried frequently to speak to her to no avail. I will do as you advise and try to email her to get clarification.

Forgive me but this is my first time on here so I'm not quite sure how to PM you, but will have a go.....

You PM someone by clicking on the "Message poster" link at the top right of any message they have posted. So if you want to PM me, click on the link at the top right of this message. To PM Admission, click on the link at the top right of her message.

If on iPhone you need to use message box at very top of page.

Thanks.

I have spoken to someone who (apparently) knows what they're talking about at LEA.

She explained that this school was a 'tricky one' and although they can admit 5 children without causing prejudice, they legally have to stick to the planned admission number of 45.

The school can organise the classes in such a way to enable the accomadation of up to 5 children in reception. Therfore, I am advised it is not a infant class size case.

She has also confirmed that there are two children who live closer to the school than us, which at the moment puts us (unofficially) 3rd on the waiting list. Not all of the acceptance forms have been returned yet, but I'm hopeful this will be our route in (offers only sent out 23rd April). However I still plan to appeal and will shortly receive my forms I hope.

That implies that it would be an ICS case if the PAN was 50, which in turn suggests that they have 5 mixed classes covering infants. That would be unusual but not impossible. You need to check how the classes are actually arranged in infants.

I would confirm send an email confirming the conversation then submit your email as evidence to the appeal. Faced with a statement from the LA that the school can admit up to 50 children without prejudice an appeal panel really has to conclude that it can allow at least 5 appeals.

To be honest, I think this is tantamount to saying that the school can take 50 pupils but they are holding back 5 place for successful appeals. They cannot do that. As you are third on the waiting list, that strongly suggests you would have got a place if they had admitted 50. I would argue that at appeal. I would also take that argument to the LGO if you lose the appeal but I hope that won't be necessary.

This is plain wrong. The PAN is the legal limit set for admission of pupils. It can be exceeded under certain strict conditions but to be saying that the LA accepts that a further 5 places can be offered without causing prejudice says that either the PAN is set wrong or that PRH is correct, the LA are holding 5 places back illegally.
I would suggest that you send an email to the SChool Admission Manager saying that as you now understand the significance of the 50 prejudice comment, that means there are 5 places available, that you are third on the waiting list and that you want them to give your child the place. That will give the LA something to think about. It will also give a very clear marker to the appeal panel that on the date in question the 5 places were available and that you were eligible for one of them.
Another reason for doing this is that I am not sure that winning at appeal is cut and dried. If the appeal panel accepts that the PAN is 45 and that no places should be given out above that figure,then they have to consider whether the school has made a case not to admit any more pupils. This is not to admit the extra 5, the question is can they admit all the appellants, which may be far more than 5. That may well be no, in which they go to the second stage and hear all the personal cases. At that point given the LAs ludicrous comments I would expect that the panel would agree that 5 more pupils can be admitted. But it will be on the strength of your personal case, not the fact that you were third on the waiting list.
The alternative scenario is that the panel do what they should not do and decide the PAN is really 50. If they do that then they will say that the first five on the waiting list have been disadvantaged and should be offered places. But they should not do this.
By trying to force the LA into doing something you achieve getting the place without the possibility of going to appeal and losing because your personal circumstances are not as good as 5 other appellants.

Gosh, lots of information to digest there. Will need to re-read in the morning.

SchoolsNightmare- I'm so glad there has been another case out there like this and it's not just me. Would be interested to hear how it turned out.

prh47bridge- I will find out more about the classes. You have re-enforced my belief that if they can go to 50 surely my daughter should have been given a place, given we are 48th.

admission- I really need to take time to fully absorb what you are saying. I can see you have very valid comments, it all seems quite complicated. I 'm not quite sure who I should be emailing? i.e personal name

I have requested an email from the representative to spoke to yesterday, to confirm/summerise what she told me. As yet no response, do you think she is aware that what she is saying is wrong/unlawful and I may use it against her/LEA.

I'm a bit at a loss of how to continue with this, you are all so well versed and know exactly what your talking about. I need to clue up quickly.

Thanks for your replies

(I have name changed as this could be quite identifiable in combination with posts under my normal name)

This sound a bit like what has happened with our school over the last few years. To explain how it came about I need to go back to the admissions for dd's year which was academic year 2009-2010.
For the first time ever there were more in catchment children then the PAN of 20 and as catchment siblings and catchment come before out of catchment siblings non of the out of catchment siblings and one catchment child failed to gain a place (rural school with fixed catchment area).
However building started in the summer of 2009 for a new reception class room due to be completed in early 2010 which would see an end to mixed year teaching in KS1 making any appeals for the school non ICS.
5 families went to appeal, the catchment child and the out of catchment siblings. The school (VA) put up no argument against admission and all 5 were offered places after just the first part of the hearing.
So roll round to the next year and there are no issues this time with catchment children and non catchment siblings, all are able to gain a place with the PAN of 20 however the LEA has a shortage of places in neighbouring areas and makes an agreement with the school that as they have managed a class of 25 the previous year they could do so again and on offers day 25 places are awarded rather then 2o. The next year same again only now planning is sorted to build another new class room although funding is still not quite sorted, this would give each year it's own class room ending mixed year teaching in the school completely so it is decided to start the consultation period to raise the PAN to 25 for the academic year of 2013-2014. This year admissions although it is now set for the higher PAN and the new classroom has its funding and will be on schedule for completion early 2013 the offical PAN is still 20. Another low birth rate in catchment (my ds will start this year) for the school but still a shortage of places a few miles away so, I am told the have gone to 25 again.
Next year it will all be official however the PAN increase will only be in place for the class starting 2013 so anyone wanting a place in the earlier years face the issue of the PAN being 20 and the classes already being over full, even if a child leaves bringing the numbers under 25 no new child will be admitted. For example, my dd's class was the first 'big' one, since reception 5 children have left the school, 3 new children have been admitted but they all had to appeal for a place as on paper the class was full.

I would imagine that a case like this is fairly unusual however it does give an indication how things like this can happen. I do feel sorry for people applying for our school, unless you are in the know you would look at the numbers and think you didn't have a cat in hells chance of getting in the school (we are very over subscribed, when I talk about low birth rate I am just talking about catchment, a great number of people living outside catchment name the school, many as first choice it is just historically they haven't had a chance of getting in, until all this business with official and unofficial PAN) where as if you are applying to join any class in KS1 or reception you would likely get in on appeal, non of the classes are currently full to 25, with the final new classroom I can imagine a bit of hell breaking out in KS2 as the current Y5 and 6 hold an even older PAN of 18!

Anyway, just though I would share as coud shine light on what is going on in this case, good luck!

Thanks for your posts..
Jeez........just spoke LEA again and rep said school has capacity for 5 extra places (if decided at appeal) and it becomes class size prejudice at 50. She said the fact I was 48th on list had no relevance now as they are compiling reserve lists that anyone can join. I asked her several times to email details of what she was saying and she categorically refused saying info would be in appeal letter. I am so mad!!

I really want to write to someone, but need help in how to word it. They seem to think that there is nothing wrong with the admissions at this school.

I would write to the head of admissions. Say that the admissions team has advised you that, although the PAN is set at 45, the school can take 50 without prejudice. Point out that the comment that the school has capacity for 5 extra places to be awarded at appeal means they are operating with a PAN of 50 but holding back 5 places for appeal which is a clear breach of the Admissions Code. You therefore trust that the 5 places available will be offered to those children who would have received them had admissions been operated correctly and, as your child is one of those affected, you look forward to receiving an offer. Tell them that if no offer is forthcoming you will refer the matter to the Local Government Ombudsman.

prh47bridge- Thanks, that's just what I needed, someone to word it in a way that sounds like I know what I'm talking about (and the system).

Tried to ring Ace today, LEA (to get a contact name) and the school but no-one answering as friday before a bank holiday!

Will get stuck into researching the finer details over the weekend.

Thanks for all the great advice.

Please get this sorted now by writing to the head of admissions, as this will just get more and more complicated as time goes on and admission appeals start. The person you spoke to, obviously realises what she has said could have consequences and this is why they are now not wanting to get involved and put anything in writing.
I would be very clear in the letter that the admission authority has 7 days to come up with a place or it goes to the LGO. If you do not specify a date then it will just go round and round in circles between the admission people and the legal people at the LA, in the hope that you either get a place of the waiting list or by appeal.

I heed both your warnings to act now and write a letter.

The way you suggest I put it to them seems quite strong, I just want to double check that I am well within my rights to do so and that it is justified what I am saying......I can hardly put that I have been advised on 'Mumsnet'.

They all seem so convinced that it is perfectly acceptable to to fill the places up to 50 pejudice with appeals. I just feel like I'm going up against Goliath.

I have found the section below in the school admission code 2012, is this the grounds I can argue are there any more sections that strictly apply to my case in the codes?

12. Section 86 of the SSFA 1998 provides that the admission authority for a maintained school (with the exception of those that select wholly by ability) must comply with any preference expressed by a parent except where to do so would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.

In your case the appeal will be held under the school admission appeal code 2012 but it is the school admission code 2010 that you need to quote as the 2012 version does not apply to this year, it applies to September 2013 admissions. I would say that a relevant paragraph in the 2010 regs was 1.18 which says that schools should not admit above the published number unless the school and the LA agree that admitting above that number will not adversely affect the school. That has clearly been agreed and as such they can admit above the PAN.

Thankyou,
Are there any points/paragraghs in either code to support the fact that if further admissions are possible (have been agreed), they should not be held back for appeals? I have been looking through, but find it hard going.

The 2010 code applies to admissions until next September. The paragraph SchoolsNightmare quotes is the correct one.