I do know what I am talking about here. Stockport are wrong. The Adjudicator correctly ruled that they were wrong but unfortunately failed to understand Stockport's twisted logic and assumed they would get it right in future. That is the only reason the objection was not upheld.
The problem is that sentence "Late applications will be ranked in accordance with published admission criteria and considered after all those received by the closing date". Stockport and the Adjudicator clearly understood it to mean different things. The Adjudicator assumed it meant that Stockport would look at the late applications after they'd looked at the on time applications and would then interleave them with the on time applications, hence producing a correct waiting list. However, that isn't what Stockport meant. They meant that they would look at late applications after those received by the closing date and then put them after the on time applications in the waiting list.
Take another look at the adjudicator's decision. The first sentence of paragraph 9 clearly and unequivocally (and correctly) states that Stockport may not place late applicants after on time applicants on the waiting list. The adjudicator is not going to contradict himself in a single decision. Having said that Stockport are in breach of the code by putting late applicants at the end of the waiting list he is not then going to say it is ok for them to continue doing so. So it is clear that his understanding of what Stockport were saying differed from Stockport's. He believed that Stockport would not in future place late applicants at the end of the waiting list. He assumed that, when they said they would not give priority to applicants based on the date on which their application was received, they meant that in the normal English interpretation of that sentence. Unfortunately they didn't. Only Stockport could argue that a process which uses the date of the application to determine whether an application goes in the first or second part of the waiting list is somehow not using the date of the application to give priority.
Look at the letter from the Council quoted in paragraph 9. The final sentence appears to say that the late applicants are added to the waiting list in the order specified by the oversubscription criteria, but that this only happens after the on time applications were put on the waiting list. That is what the adjudicator understood it to mean. However, that isn't what Stockport meant. Stockport meant that the late applicants are ordered by the oversubscription criteria and then placed after the on time applicants.
Go back to paragraph 3.19 of the Admissions Code. It says they cannot give priority based on the date on which an application was received. So, when putting the waiting list in order they cannot use the date on which the application was received, either directly or indirectly. If they don't know the date on which your application was received they don't know whether or not an application was late. So if they aren't using the date on which the application was received they can't put late applications at the end of the waiting list. But Stockport are putting late applications at the end of the waiting list, so they are giving priority based on the date on which an application was received. Despite their twisted logic and attempts to argue that black is white, Stockport are clearly in breach of the Admission Code. The adjudicator said so last year.
Please, please, please refer this to the adjudicator. I cannot do so as, although I helped the parent in the case which resulted in the decision we are discussing, I am not a parent in Stockport. I want Stockport to stop unfairly disadvantaging parents such as yourself. You were penalised once for being late in that you didn't get a place at any of your preferred schools. They may not penalise you again by putting you at the back of the waiting list. I will be amazed if the adjudicator rules that Stockport are allowed to continue this practise, especially since the decision last year clearly states that the practise is a breach of the Admissions Code.
I am also puzzled about what is happening with this waiting list. Where has everyone gone? Have they all been admitted? And I still don't understand why there is anyone on the late part of the list in front of you.