APPEALS for places at Skipton's two grammar schools this year were "consistent, but consistently unfair".

The Ombudsman, acting on complaints from 10 sets of parents, found three cases of maladministration in the way North Yorkshire County Council conducted the appeals earlier this year.

Almost 50 children were awarded a second appeal this summer as the complaint was investigated.

The Ombudsman found that the panel considering appeals was given no guidance as to what level of evidence parents needed to provide to win an appeal at a grammar school. This was maladministration and made appeals "consistent but consistently unfair".

When questioned, panel members said they upheld appeals if they were sure "beyond all reasonable doubt" - the criminal burden of proof rather than the civil standard of "balance of probability" which they should have used.

Parents argued that evidence on a child's health, or emotional condition due to family circumstances, at the time of the tests was brushed aside by the appeal panel.

The education authority's failure to guide the panel was also ruled maladministration.

However, parents who brought the complaint said that while they were satisfied that the education authority had been found to have maladministered the appeals, the argument about the reliability of the tests had been sidestepped.

"We still maintain that the selection tests currently used are unreliable and the results are swayed by high level private tuition and practice. The education authority insists that this had little effect on the results but failed to provide any evidence while parents can produce a mass of evidence to say that it had a major effect. We are disappointed that the education authority is still allowed to make these incorrect statements without producing evidence," said the parents.

"With selection tests coming up shortly we strongly advise all parents not to disadvantage their child's chances and to get practising. Parents will find the same mantra from the education authority that there's nothing wrong with the tests."

The Herald understands that the education authority is withdrawing its comments urging parents not to conduct practice tests or coaching for children who sit the entrance exam this year.

The Ombudsman also criticised the authority after a headteacher, asked for his views about the suitability of a child, placed a tick near but outside the box marked "appropriate".

The parent claimed that in the appeal an officer explained that this was an unwritten code used by headteachers to mask what they really feel.

The officer said there was no unwritten code but that a head teacher may be uncertain and place ticks between boxes.

The ombudsman criticised the appeal panel for not seeking an adjournment and finding out the headteacher's views.

"It was not enough that the relevant information was ascertained after the hearing and conveyed to the panel members in the absence of the parents. The failure to send out unambiguous papers and the failure to consider an adjournment were maladministration," ruled the Ombudsman.

Other issues were cited as "cause for concern". The parents complained that the person who advised them before the appeal then turned up to oppose their case in the appeal.

"The change of role from adviser to adversary is unnerving to some parents and it may give the LEA officer the upper hand. The officer knows how the parents may argue and has even in some cases given advice on tactics," said the Ombudsman.

The attitude of the appeal panel chairman was criticised by parents who described her as intimidating, aggressive and prone to interrupt. In contrast an appeal panel member said she was "mumsy" and "homey" while an education officer described the chairman as "jolly, pleasant, bouncy and lovely".

The Ombudsman said he found no maladministration but the chairman should consider some of the comments.

The education authority has been advised to review its training procedures, give clear guidance and ensure that headteachers complete report forms in a clear, unambiguous way.

The council is also asked to ensure that officers who represent the council on the day of the appeal do not give out pre-appeal advice to parents to avoid any apparent conflict of interest.

North Yorkshire was commended for offering new appeals promptly and the Ombudsman said he regarded that action as satisfactorily resolving the complaint.