Appeal panel mistake

[Afsana1]

I have just received a letter saying that we have not won the junior appeal and has stated the reasons why. My problem is it has mentioned that the main reason I wanted this school is due to relatives attending however I have never mentioned this not in the appeal and not in any letters I have sent them. Why are they using info that I haven't given them. I don't have any relatives attending there. What can I do because they have considered info that I haven't given them. Thank you

Did you mention the relatives in the original application?

If you did, then the panel is acting correctly, as they will be considering if the admissions authority had acted correctly in deciding your original application. New material, which wasn't included in the original application, shouldn't really be considered, though some panels may be sympathetic to it. Is this an ICS appeal (years R-2, where classes have a limit of 30)?

If at no point did you mention relatives, then they have probably muddled you up with another family, and this may be grounds to complain. This will not in itself gain you a place. But it should get you a fresh appeal.

I never in my original statement said anything about relatives going there as I don't so there is no reason to mention it.

I don't think they have sent me someone else's letter as it does have the info I mentioned on there. I don't know wether it's worth doing the appeal again

Apologies if I'm muddling you with someone else, but aren't you the poster who wanted relatives to be able to take your child to school for you when you are unwell/unable? Might this be what the letter is alluding to?

I am her but the letter says "moreover when this school was applied for mother could not have been suffering with pnd as the baby had not yet been born. This lead panel to conclude there must have been other reasons for applying for this school, namely that relatives were attending." that is what it says in the letter they didn't mention anything about my sister.

It also says " the panel felt that your principle reasons for applying were as follows mothers medical issues and family attending the school."

Does it make a difference to the outcome - is the other bits about the pnd and applying before the babies birth true?

What bothers me is that they have highlighted something I have not used as my argument if you get what I mean. The main reasons were medical but also that it is the neighbouring school to her infant school and obviously I want my dd to have the best education. The pnd did happen after the application but I believe it is important to the appeal that is why I mentioned it. I don't mind them not giving me a place but using something I haven't said as they basis is what bothers me. I'm sorry that I'm rambling on xxc

The panel should not be guessing your reasons for wanting a particular school. And your reasons for applying for the school are irrelevant. Similarly, whether or not you were suffering from PND at the time you applied is entirely irrelevant unless you were suggesting that the LA made a mistake and should have given your child priority because of your PND.

As this is a junior school appeal it is an ordinary prejudice case. The panel should therefore have been looking at how your child will be disadvantaged if not admitted to this school and weighing that against the problems the school will face through having an additional pupil. They should not be deciding whether or not they approve of your reasons for applying for the school in the first place.

On a previous thread you said you were getting a letter from your doctor about your PND. If you supplied a doctor's letter the panel is entitled to decide it isn't strong enough to justify awarding your child a place. They are NOT entitled to ignore the letter just because you weren't suffering from PND at the time you applied. Indeed, even without a doctor's letter, if you say that your child will be adversely affected by your PND unless she is admitted to this school, they should consider that evidence. It would be a very weak case in the absence of a doctor's letter but when you started suffering from PND is irrelevant.

It sounds to me like this panel has got the decision making process seriously wrong. If you refer this to the Local Government Ombudsman and they agree the panel got it wrong they will recommend a second appeal with a different panel. That does not, of course, mean you will succeed. That depends on the strength of your case. Note that, if you do get a second appeal, you are entitled to strengthen your case or even submit a completely different case if you want.

I did submit the letter in reference to the letter they say " although medical evidence was produced in the form of a gp letter it did not indicate the issue was long term." thank you for everyone's advice I will ring them on monday. They have bought up the subject of relatives attending three times and have put a lot of emphasis on that. I mentioned about the social and emotional implications on dd but they have not mentioned that.

They may have considered the letter properly but I think there are enough extraneous comments in the decision letter to raise real questions about their way they arrived at their decision.

Just for clarity, you need to ring the Local Government Ombudsman, NOT your LA.

Thank you

Am very sorry to hear this news. My understanding from your earlier thread was that the main reason you applied for this Junior school was that your daughter is already a pupil at the nearby (linked?) Infant school - but because you live out of catchment, she has been offered a place at a school nearly 2 miles away whereas her friends from the infants school are transferring to the Junior school. As Junior school classes are not limited to 30 pupils, the decision to refuse her a place does disadvantage her educationally and socially and could be seen as "unreasonable". You already have a strong case even without the additional difficulties of having PND.

It's the neighbouring school they go there to assemblies etc there. I thought we had a good case as well but what can you say? It's just they have considered points I have not made and the points I have made have not been considered. Let's see what happens xxx

I agree with PRH that the decision letter is seriously flawed as it contains information that is clearly not about your appeal. Now this might be just an incompetent clerk having copied and pasted the decision letter and made a right mess of it but you do not know this and it is therefore appropriate that you do refer it to the LGO.
If nothing else they will be able to look at the notes taken by the clerk to ascertain whether the panel did make decisions on the right case or not.