Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision her child does not qualify for free home to school transport. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, complains about the Council’s decision her daughter does not qualify for free school transport.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X applied for free transport to school for her daughter. The Council refused the application stating she did not meet the criteria for travel assistance as she was not attending the nearest available school.
8. The Council’s policy says it will provide free home to school transport for children of compulsory school age to the nearest suitable school from their home address who meet the qualifying distance criteria.
9. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision via the stage 2 review panel and provided additional information about her difficulties in transporting her children to school whilst her daughter does not have free school transport.
10. The panel considered Mrs X’s appeal and the additional information she provided. It did not uphold the appeal. It found Miss X’s application did not meet the eligibility criteria for travel assistance as her daughter is not attending the nearest available school. It considered the information Mrs X provided about her circumstances and parental preference for the school however it found these did not amount to exceptional circumstances which would cause it to depart from the transport policy.
11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council here. It has considered and decided Mrs X’s application in line with its published policy. We are not an appeal body and it is not our role to question the Council’s decisions where, as here, there is no sign of fault in the way it was reached.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is no sign of fault by the Council in its decision to refuse Mrs X’s school transport application.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman