Ceri Meazey from Rhiwbina, Cardiff, is a mother of two and works as an allocator. Her younger son was refused a place at the school of her choice.
"Our first choice of school was a primary school relatively close to our local area, but outside our catchments area school. We chose it because our elder son went there and we wanted both children in the same school. To have two children in different schools is logistically very difficult. Also, my son (younger) had been attending the nursery on the school site, had a child minder close to the school and had made friends there. He had also been going to the school from a very early age with me to drop his older brother off in the mornings. He was used to the school, the staff, and a lot of the children, especially his older brother's friends.
When the applications for entry to the reception class were reviewed, my son and one other child in the nursery were refused admission on the grounds that there would be class size prejudice, as 60 places had been allocated, 30 in each of the two reception classes. They were refused because the LEA applied their own admissions policy and claimed that they couldn't legally exceed 30 in each reception class. Fifty-two children from the catchments area were given places in priority to those outside the catchments area, like ourselves. At the time there were 10 applications for places where children outside the catchments area already had siblings attending the school. Places were allocated on the basis that those with the youngest sibling had priority. My elder son was the oldest of the siblings (by only a number of weeks) and so my younger son was refused a place.
After the initial refusal, the LEA sent us a form for us to appeal against the decision. The basis of our appeal was personal circumstance i.e. the logistical problems associated with having young children in two different schools, child care that was already in place, My younger son's medical condition (asthma), the fact that he had already become part of a group of children in the nursery who would be attending the school and the emotional effect that sending him to a school totally unfamiliar to him would have, considering how well he had become used to the school. Our application for appeal was supported by letters from our GP, MP and AM, as well as a letter of concern from my employer over the logistics of having to drop off young children in different schools that may cause problems i.e. getting to work on time etc.
We were given no advice from the school or local authority and we went to the appeal without legal representation. The appeal panel were directed by the LEA not to take into consideration personal circumstances as class size prejudice had been demonstrated and this was the basis for the appeal panel's rejection of our application. At this stage, we accepted the decision, thinking that the Council had acted properly and lawfully. We believed that they were taking direction over their admission policy from central government. This wasn't the case - the LEA applies its own interpretation of the law.
After the appeal decision, we accepted a place at another primary school. We were very fortunate that a friend was able to help with taking our younger son to school while I took my elder son to the other school.
Some time after the appeal, a colleague of my husband heard of our case and sent us legal arguments that had been used in their case against the same authority. At the same time, our MP asked how we had got on in our appeal and, when we told them about the legal arguments, they approached the Welsh Assembly who advised using the Local Authority Ombudsman. The LEA questioned the Ombudsman jurisdiction and refused to reconsider the decision in light of the legal arguments put before them. The Ombudsman recommended we seek legal advice, so we approached a solicitor who was an expert in education law. He quickly submitted judicial review papers to the High Court. On being advised of this action, the LEA immediately conceded that the original appeal was wrong and offered us a fresh appeal hearing. I believe this was to avoid costs and the publicity of going to court as the legal arguments against them were overwhelming and they had lost appeal cases on similar grounds previously. Our solicitor represented us at the appeal and the appeal panel, under the weight of legal argument against them, unanimously found in our favour.Advice
Even though the whole process has cost a considerable amount of money in legal fees, it's been worth it. Our younger son, now that he is back in our first choice school with his brother and his old friends, is much happier and now looks forward to going to school.
Our advice to any other parents is to seek legal advice as soon as possible, preferably from an expert in Education Law. Our concern is that, even though the LEA has been shown to have a flawed admission policy, they will not change it. They appear to be content in allowing parents to go to the expense of legally challenging them in Appeal.
I'd advise any parents to be wary of any decision made by the LEA against them and to seek legal advice immediately and be represented at appeal hearings. It may cost a lot of money but, in the long run and particularly for the sake of the children, it's worth it. The logistical nightmare of having young children in two different schools is to be avoided if at all possible, as is the detrimental emotional effects on the children.
The law states that you have the right to express a preference of school and give reasons for that preference. This is not only covered by UK legislation but also European Human Rights legislation. In fact, the way the admissions application form is set out, those within the catchments area of a school are not requested to give reasons for their choice of school, therefore those outside the catchments area who are requested to give reasons for their choice are those who comply with legislation and technically should be given priority to places. It's worth looking at future application forms sent out by the LEA. Despite cases against them, I feel that they will not bother to change the forms but let parents spend money on legal fees and challenge them at appeal."
Ceri, Cardiff
