ICS appeal - question about procedure

[fatfloosie]

Have spoken to the Clerk of the Appeals Team for our forthcoming ICS appeal and am now more confused than before I rang!

He seemed to imply that if Stage 1 was not proven by the Admission Authority then it would be decided how many more pupils could be admitted and then Stage 2 would be to decide - between all the pupils appealing - who would be admitted. He also implied that we would not win Stage 2 as there were some appellants with 'issues'. (Wondering if he should have told me this but am glad to have the info and have downgraded expectations even further!)

I had previously thought the decision would only be between all the pupils affected by any Admission Authority errors proven in Stage 1.

Is this correct or is he getting mixed up between ICS and non-ICS appeals?

It does sound like he is confused which is a concern.

For an ICS appeal, any child who would not have got a place if admissions had been administered correctly should lose their appeal at stage 1 and should therefore not be part of the panel's discussions at stage 2.

And there is no way he should have been telling you anything about the other appellants.

Thanks for replying. How much information will we be given on the day? Will we be told for example "the Panel agree the Admission Authority has made a mistake affecting 6 pupils but the school can only admit 2 more pupils" before we go to stage 2? Or do we do stage 2 in ignorance?

In an ICS appeal, the first stage is the admission authority making the case for not admitting and for the fact that it is an infant class size case.
So the first question that the panel has to ask itself at the end of stage 1 is whether it is an infant class size case and whether the admission of additional children would breach the ICS size limit.
Secondly the panel has to decide whether the admission arrangements comply with the mandatory requirements of the school admission code.
Thirdly whether the admission arrangements were correctly and impartially applied.
Fourthly whether the decision to refuse admission was one that a reasonable admission authority would have made in the circumstances.
It is possible to uphold the appeal at the end of stage 1 if there is an obvious problem and the child in question should have been offered a place. In a situation where there could be a number of appellants who should have been offered a place if the admission arrangements had been properly implemented, then they are either all admitted or if the panel thinks that this would seriously prejudice the provision of efficient education the panel goes to the second stage. The panel will use the second stage to ascertain each of the appellants cases and then decide how many to admit and decide which should be admitted based on the strength of each case.
The clerk is definitely mixing up ICS regs cases with ordinary cases from your post. It is not about how many more can be admitted, which are the more deserving as in an ordinary case but has mistake been made. If a mistake was made then would the appellant have a place if it had been done correctly and then if by the remote chance there a good few such cases, then the panel has the problem of deciding who to admit.
The % of cases won that ICS regs cases is very low and it is unusual for a mistake to be made.

Thanks for your reply admission. It's now got even more complicated:

I hand delivered my supporting documents yesterday and spoke to the Clerk in person. He explained that the reason for potentially doing an ICS appeal as if it was a non-ICS appeal was because it would potentially be too complex or even impossible to work out exactly how many or who has been denied a place.

Has anyone come across this before? I can sort of see where he is coming from.

I am appealing on the basis of DD (in category 5 - half of which got places) being denied a place due to children being placed in category 3 who should have been in category 6. I should imagine there will also be people appealing on the basis that category 5 either should not exist or was not clear enough in the prospectus.

So how does this pan out if the panel agree the children shouldn't have been in category 3 but also agree that category 5 is dodgy? (Am fairly sure DD would be behind a fair few children from category 6 if category 5 didn't exist.)

I am sorry but he is talking rubbish. The Appeals Code is very clear on the process to be followed for an ICS appeal. Admission has explained the process. That process is compulsory. They cannot do something else. If they do, any parent who has their appeal rejected should refer the matter to the LGO, particularly if they have good evidence that their child would have been admitted if the LA hadn't messed up.

If they decide that children were placed in category 3 incorrectly but category 5 is invalid the panel will probably have to ask the LA to work out who would have been admitted if they had not included those children in category 3 and category 5 did not exist. So it sounds like you need to hope they agree with you on category 3 but decide that category 5 is ok. Based on what I know of the situation with your LA, I think there is a reasonable chance that the panel will come to that conclusion but unfortunately there are no guarantees.

I am gobsmacked. If this is the clerk to the panel saying this to you, then there is precious little chance that the panel will be making the right decisions during the appeal, when he is advising them!.
You have already been given information by the clerk that you should not have - some of the appellants have issues which will get a place at stage 2 and now the clerk is effectively saying they have not got a clue whether the admission process was done properly and they will botch the process to get around that.
I can only suggest that you go to the appeal with an open mind and a notebook and make copious notes on what is said as this has all the hallmarks of a case that will end up with the LGO.

Thanks very much for the advice. I will try and take copious notes but I expect my hands will be shaking!

I have asked the LA for more information so I can try and work out for myself how things would have panned out in various scenarios but they have not got back to me yet and as the Appeal is on Friday they may not do so in time. I will chase by phone tomorrow but as I only asked for the info yesterday morning I guess I am pushing it a bit.

There is one excepted child due to LA error in Reception for 2012 already according to my appeal documents. I presume this also gets taken into account? So if my case is that 3 children from Category 5 have been displaced by children being placed in Category 3 when they should have been in Category 6, but the last child on distance in Category 5 got a place in error, then only two children in Category 5 have been affected by the Category 3/6 error?

Thanks again in anticipation

The answer to your question is that it sounds like it. But to be honest I have no idea how this will be resolved. From what I know about this case I can't see any way anyone can say with certainty who should have been admitted.

More questions .. sorry ..

Appeal was postponed with one day's notice because Chair of Panel wanted to get legal advice. When it's rearranged will we get the same panel or potentially a different one?

Can the Admission Authority, having now had a copy of all our statements and supporting documents, submit a new statement for the rescheduled appeal and pretend that their original rather rubbish one never existed? To pre-empt this can I submit a copy of their original statement as a supporting document to my own statement? (Some parts of it were very helpful to my case I thought!)

Also, if the Panel have had to get legal advice about the admission arrangements isn't that a bit of a clincher in terms of whether said arrangements comply with para 1.71 "must ensure . . are free from doubt and easily understood"?

Thanks again . .

I'm not surprised the chair wants legal advice. It would be interesting to know whether they want advice on the admission arrangements or the process for deciding these appeals. The Appeals Code assumes that it is possible for the panel to work out whether or not a child would have been admitted. It doesn't cater for the situation where there are a large number of appeals and the LA has dug itself such a deep hole that no-one can work out who should have been admitted.

I would expect the LA to use the same panel if possible. Depending on their other commitments, it may, of course, not be possible to have exactly the same panel but I would expect changes to be minimal.

The Appeals Code does not specifically say that the authority cannot submit additional evidence, although it seems to imply that any late evidence will be from the appellants rather than the LA. I don't know of any LGO rulings covering this type of situation, although there may be one I don't know about.

I am also not aware of any such rulings by the LGO. However I have been involved in situations where in a complicated case, there was an assumption that it was an infant class size case, when in fact it was not, after I queried the assumptions made. In that situation the LA did have to send out new papers for the new situation, but not a completely new statement.
I would say if the LA come up with a completely new case then it is quite pertinent for you to pick holes in the differences between the two cases presented. Remember the panel will also have had the first version and are going to be equally as interested in the changes. The fact that the Chair has already queried the original papers leading to a postponement is quite telling about how the are looking at the case supplied.
As the case did not start, it could in theory be a completely different panel (and if the LA are going to change their case a lot, they may want that) but normally it would be the same panel.