In-year transfer appeal, Y3 - do I have much chance of success?

[Hollyhocks7]

Hi, I have been reading previous threads on primary appeals and wondered whether any of the MN appeal experts could tell me whether my case is worth appealing.
We moved from central to outer London 3 months ago and I want to get my DD into our local catholic school (we are catholic and she is currently at a catholic school) as we are now 7 miles away from her current school which represents a journey time of 50-70 mins depending on traffic. However, the main reason for wanting her to attend this school is to make new friends and settle into the area. She is a very sociable child who is desperate to make friends near her new home. It is not possible for her to have play dates with her current school friends midweek now as the traffic is worse the later we leave for the drive home, so we literally jump in the car as soon as we get out of the school gates. The drive home also means she can no longer attend any after school clubs at her current school. Another important reason for wanting to transfer to this school is that DD will be making her first holy communion this year so it is particularly important to me that she remains in a catholic school as some of the preparation for this is done in class. She has started to get to know a few children at our new parish church, and will get to know many more when the Holy Communion preparation classes (at the church) start next month. Most of these children also attend the school I want to appeal to. However, the school seems hostile to the idea of me appealing so I am wondering whether it is worth it. There are also other things that the school would offer my DC (music and other clubs over and above other local schools and indeed her current school). We are already on the waiting list and on those of 2 other catholic schools in the borough. There are 30 in the class. 3 form entry.

I'm trying to anticipate questions I will get asked, I think the most likely is something to the effect of "have you applied to the other local schools ? Are they all full?" How would I best answer this ? Truth is that I'm on the waiting list for 2 others and don't know about the rest - though in general schools in the borough are full

It would not be unusual to be asked whether you have considered other local schools and it will do you no harm to say that you are also on the waiting list for two other local schools. It confirms to the panel that you are willing to consider other alternatives and have not just chosen the one school which you are appealing for.
It is not for you to say other schools are full it is for the admission authority to do so. But in this case the admission authority is the school and they will not know what the situation is with other schools. So for you the simple answer is that all the schools that you have applied for are full.

Sorry to keep coming back with questions- the hearing is this week so I'll stop soon! Just thinking again about the school saying they would have to take 'qualifying measures' - if, when I ask my questions, they say they are legally bound to do this (as they would be in ICS) should I correct them or leave it for the panel to correct (or not)?

Regardless of whether or not they say it in the hearing they have said it in their written case. I would therefore ask them to justify that statement given that this is a Y3 appeal and hence infant class size limits do not apply.

I'm wondering whether they realise that a y3 appeal is different to a reception one. If not, I should point it out?

The panel and the clerk should be well aware of the differences between a Y3 appeal and one for Reception. You should not need to point it out to them.

Hello - my appeal was yesterday and I was informed today that we had lost - they decided against us. I felt that I'd put my case forward well and the Headteacher, representing the school, hardly put forward a case at all except to say that they were already at PAN and would have to take qualifying measures if they admitted another pupil. I questioned her about this but she said the governors would want to employ another teacher. The panel didn't ask any questions at all.
Thank you all very much for your help and patience with my endless questions. I am grateful. And I am glad I appealed, at least I feel I tried my best, and I wouldn't have known it was worth a shot if I hadn't read these threads. It's all been very illuminating.

No they would not have to take qualifying measures. This was not a KS1 case. And the panel should not have been swayed by the head saying that the governors would want to employ another teacher.

Have you had the decision letter? If so, what does it say? You may have a case for referring this to the LGO (or the EFA if it is an academy).

Yes, I've had the letter - it says that the panel was satisfied that to admit children into the year group over and above PAN would prejudice provision of efficient education and resources. They accepted the school's argument that an additional pupil would impact on amount of attention each child received. (At the hearing the head also talked about another child on the waiting list before my daughter having siblings at the school, and neither the clerk nor the panel questioned her or told her it was irrelevant to my appeal.) The letter also said that they didn't find my arguments convincing enough or that the school was especially suited to meet the needs of my child 'over and above other schools'. I can scan the letter if you would like to see it.

The panel are not suggesting it was an ICS appeal, I don't think, and the Head was suggesting that the school would want to take these measures whether they were legally obliged to or not

I would be interested to see the letter because a basic requirement is that the school prove prejudice over and above having reached PAN. They appear to be using having reached PAN as being the main reason for proving prejudice. I would not consider an additional pupil impacting on the amount of attention would be sufficient on its own to prove prejudice.

Yes, I would like to see it please.

Thanks for sending that through.

I think you should refer this to the LGO. The case to refuse admission is grossly inadequate, basically amounting to saying that the school is at PAN and doesn't want to admit any more pupils. I am with Admission that this is far too weak a case to prove prejudice and does not meet the requirements of the Appeals Code. The fact the appeal panel has accepted this case calls into question the quality of their training and their level of independence. I think most appeal panels faced with this case would have decided that the school had not shown that there would be any prejudice and found in your favour.

I would hope that a referral to the LGO would result in them recommending a fresh hearing in front of a different appeal panel. I suspect they will also tell the school they need to present a better case. So you may find that the school presents a much stronger case to the second appeal, making it harder for you to win. It is therefore by no means guaranteed that a second hearing will result in a different outcome but you should certainly give it a go. From the information you have sent me I do not think you have had a fair hearing.

I have replied to hollyhocks privately but it effectively says the same as PRH above. Sorry to say I think you have had a poor deal on this appeal but the only way to move forward is to take it to the LGO or accept the current situation.

The appeal panel was organised by the council - as opposed to the diocese - so is it possible that they were not impartial?

I mean I would expect a greater likelihood of independence from a panel organised by the council

So would I. But it doesn't really matter. Your complaint is that the appeal panel has found prejudice to the school on the basis of a case that is far too weak to justify such a conclusion. Paragraph 3.10 of the Appeal Code states that, "the admission authority must be able to demonstrate prejudice over and above the fact that the published admission number has already been reached". The admission authority does not appear to have done so and therefore there was no basis on which the panel could conclude that there would be prejudice to the school if your daughter was admitted.

I would refer the matter to the LGO if it could lead to the 3 separate bodies - the school, the panel, and democratic services/the clerk - being reprimanded by the LGO, as if what you say is true, all have failed to follow the correct procedure, and do the jobs that they are paid by the taxpayer to do properly. I am very annoyed at the poor level of service. If, however, the only possible outcome could be another appeal hearing, then there is no point as far as I am concerned, as I am much more likely to lose a second appeal, and also I have a nasty taste in my mouth about the school itself now, due to their hostility to the appeal and the attitude of both the admissions officer and head teacher. I suppose the adversarial nature of an appeal tends to have this effect, but this school was particularly unfriendly, when I look back on the whole course of events, and gave the impression of being a private members club. As someone who has always supported the existence of faith schools, I now have serious misgivings about VA schools, and other schools which are their own admission authority.

If you refer the matter to the LGO they will investigate and issue a decision. If they think there is a problem they will make recommendations as to what should happen to resolve the issue. Normally that would be a further appeal with a fresh panel. It is then up to the admission authority (the school in this case) to arrange the fresh hearing and ensure there is no repetition of the problems either in that hearing or in any hearing involving other parents in future.

I would not say that you are much more likely to lose a second appeal. The school may put up a better case second time around but that doesn't mean you will lose. It depends on whether the appeal panel think the school's case to refuse admission outweighs your case. Given that they are running classes of 30 in Y3 I doubt the school's case with be particularly strong - many schools have larger classes in Y3.

If there is a fresh hearing the appeal panel will not be told that this is a second hearing. They are not there to review the first panel's decision. They are there to hear the case from scratch and make a decision. Second appeals are frequently successful.

On a slightly different matter, do you know how long you can delay starting at a school as an in-year transfer once you have been offered/accepted an offer of a place? Do you have to start immediately?

You would normally be expected to take up the place within a few weeks.

Sorry for the vagueness, by the way. There is no fixed period of time. It varies from LA to LA and, in some cases, from school to school.