Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the home to school transport offered to her son. This is because it is reasonable for Ms X to use the Council’s own appeals process to challenge its decisions. The Council has agreed to reimburse Ms X for transport she provided while her son received Education Other Than At School. An investigation at the current time would not achieve anything more.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms X, complained about the home to school transport offered to her son (Y). Ms X is unhappy the Council has refused her request for transport costs from the summer term 2023 onwards. Ms X also complained the Council had failed to reimburse her for earlier transport she provided when Y received Education Other Than At School (EOTAS).

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal; or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In summer 2023, Y started to attend school part-time. Y has an Education Health and Care Plan. Y previously received EOTAS. Ms X asked the Council to pay a mileage allowance to cover the costs of taking Y to school. The Council has so far refused Ms X’s request because it provides Y’s sibling (Z) with transport to the same school. It says Y can share the transport. Alternatively, it will pay a single mileage allowance and Ms X can take both children. But it will not provide a mileage allowance for Y and transport for Z.
6. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. This is because in its letter to Ms X dated 20 October the Council said she could challenge its decision via its appeals process. This has two stages, and the final stage involves an independent panel. It is reasonable for Ms X to use this process. If she was unhappy with the outcome she could come back to the Ombudsman.
7. As part of her complaint Ms X also referred to the transport she had provided before the summer term when Y received EOTAS. Ms X said she had not been reimbursed for this. In response to our enquiries the Council said it had located Ms X’s request and would contact her about the amount to be paid. It is disappointing this matter was only resolved with our intervention. But we will not investigate this point as it would not achieve a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is reasonable for her to appeal, and an investigation would not achieve anything more.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman