Article as featured on thewww.bbc.co.uk
website
DATED: 14th October 2005
CHOOSING A SCHOOL
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
DISCLAIMER:
The information contained in this web site is provided solely for information purposes only. It does not constitute legal or other
professional advice. Sinclairs does not give any endorsement, warranty or representation, expressed or implied by statute
collaterally or otherwise with regard to the products or services which are advised or promoted on this or any linked sites.
Sinclairs Solicitors accept no responsibility for loss or damage which may arise from errors or omissions of information contained in the
web site or other site that may be linked to this site from time to time or for reliance on any such information.
It is important that those who have access to the site and require help take proper legal advice by contacting the firm of Sinclairs so that
we can properly advise on the information that you are able to provide us.
Contacting us:
If you wish to make enquiries to a department directly please use our 'Contact Form' or, alternatively use our global e-mail
sinclairs@sinclairslaw.co.uk
|
Printer friendly version