Kent County Council (20 003 409)

Category : Education > COVID-19

Decision : Not upheld

Decision date : 15 Jun 2021

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We did not uphold a complaint by four parents about the Council’s decision not to refund the cost of travel passes they bought for their children to get to school. The parents say they were unable to use the passes from March to July 2020 when schools were closed because of COVID-19. There was no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to offer a goodwill payment instead of a refund.

The complaint

  1. The four complainants in this case complain about the Council’s decision not to refund the cost of travel passes bought for their children to get to school. They say because of school closures in March 2020, they were unable to use the passes and they want a refund for the whole period the passes were not used. They are unhappy with the offer made by the Council to refund a portion of the cost.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
  2. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
  3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I have considered the complaints made by Mr A, Mrs B, Mr C and Mrs D and the documents they provided.
  2. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaints and the documents it provided in response to my enquiries.
  3. The complainants and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

  1. This complaint involves events that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Government introduced a range of new and frequently updated rules and guidance during this time. We can consider whether the Council followed the relevant legislation, guidance and our published ‘Good Administrative Practice during the response to Covid-19’.
  2. The Council runs a discretionary transport scheme, called the Kent Travel Saver. Parents of children in school years 7 to 11 can buy a bus pass which allows the child to travel to and from school. The Council subsidises the cost of the pass. It says the saving is up to 50% of what a parent might expect to pay if they bought an annual season ticket direct from a bus operator.
  3. In the school year September 2019 to July 2020, the pass cost £350 if paid for in full at the time of purchase, with an added £10 charge for those who chose to pay by instalments. The Council provides passes at a reduced cost, or free, to families on a low income, households with three or more children needing a pass, young carers and looked after children.
  4. In the information provided to parents about the scheme in 2019, the Council said once a child collected their pass it could not issue a refund. Passes were valid from the point of issue until 31 July 2020 and could be used Monday to Friday between 6am and 7pm. Some bus operators allowed pass holders to use their services outside of those times.
  5. The number of young people using the passes changes throughout the school year. However, the Council says in January 2020 there were 24,800 passes issued to young people aged under 16.

What happened

  1. The complainants bought Travel Saver passes for their children:
    • Mr A bought passes for two children and paid by instalments.
    • Mrs B bought a pass for one child and paid in full at the time of purchase.
    • Mr C bought passes for two children. He paid for one in full at the time of purchase and one by instalments.
    • Mrs D bought passes for two children and paid by instalments.
  2. On 18 March 2020, the Government announced schools in England would close to most pupils on 23 March as part of the first national lockdown. It said schools would remain open for children of key workers and those who were vulnerable.
  3. On 20 March, the Council said it was reviewing how and how much it would refund parents for the unused portion of the travel passes. It suspended collection of the final instalment which was due by 28 March.
  4. On 25 March, the Department for Transport wrote to all councils. It asked them to continue paying bus and coach operators for tendered services, home to school transport and concessionary fares at the level they were before the COVID-19 outbreak. It said this would ensure local transport services were still available to those that needed them most and would help ensure bus service providers could continue to play a central role in communities after the pandemic.
  5. On 3 July, the Council emailed parents to explain how it would compensate users of the Travel Saver scheme for the months their child had not been able to use their pass. It said it was continuing to pay bus operators to protect future services so its costs to provide the Travel Saver scheme had not reduced. The Council said it had decided to offer some form of compensation as a goodwill gesture for the missed benefit of not being able to use the scheme. It said:
    • For those who had paid by instalments, the last instalment would be cancelled and the Council would not collect the final payment. For most people, this final instalment was either £43 or £50 depending on the terms of their repayments.
    • For those who had paid in full at the time of purchase, the Council offered £50.
  6. Mr A, Mrs B, Mr C and Mrs D complained to the Council about the offer of compensation and asked for this to be higher. In response, the Council said on average it paid transport operators about double what parents paid for each pass. Each year it contributed £8 million to the Travel Saver scheme on top of the fees paid by parents. The Council said this meant at a certain point in the year, typically in January for a full cost pass, the cost to the Council for each pass exceeded the fee paid by parents. Therefore, the Council considered by the time the schools closed in March, no refund would theoretically have been due.
  7. The Council also highlighted it was continuing to pay bus operators at their usual rates before the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure services survived. This meant it had not seen any cost savings arising from school closures. It said it wanted to recognise that children had lost some benefit of their travel pass but had to ensure any goodwill gesture remained affordable and did not jeopardise the scheme going forward. The Council said it believed the goodwill payments were fair and reasonable.
  8. All four parents asked for their complaints to be considered at stage two of the Council’s complaints procedure. The Council’s response reiterated what it had said at stage one. It highlighted the pressures on the Council’s budget from added costs and said a larger refund would put the Travel Saver scheme at risk.
  9. In response to my enquiries, the Council said:
    • Because of the exceptional circumstances of schools closing, it agreed to depart from its contractual position and offer partial refunds as a gesture of goodwill.
    • The passes remained available to use during the period of school closures for those who continued to attend school.
    • Deciding the value of the goodwill payment was complicated by several factors, including whether the parent was up to date on their payments, whether they had chosen to pay by instalments and if so, how many instalments were outstanding.
    • Administrating the payments was a challenge because it was a peak period during the pandemic and there were almost 25,000 accounts to review and act on.
  10. The Council recognised there would be some differences in the payment made depending on the individual status of each customer. However, it considered this was acceptable in the context of a package of ‘goodwill payments’ rather than ‘refunds’.

Analysis

  1. The terms of the Kent Travel Saver were clear that no refunds would be made once passes had been issued. The Council has provided evidence this information was available to parents at the time they applied for the passes. I do not find fault with the Council’s decision not to issue a refund.
  2. The Council has explained how it arrived at its decision to offer a goodwill payment and how it calculated the value of such payments. The Council had to weigh its responsibility to continue funding transport providers to secure bus routes for those who needed them during the pandemic, against the impact on those who had paid for passes. Pass-holders already benefit from a heavily subsidised scheme at considerable cost to the Council. I am satisfied there was no fault in the Council’s decision to make a goodwill payment.
  3. While there was a difference in the value of the goodwill payments made to those who had bought passes, the Council has explained the administrative complexities of making such payments. In light of this, I do not consider there to be fault in the Council’s decision to make goodwill payments of different values. I do not consider a difference of £7 to have caused significant injustice which would require the Council to take further action.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I have completed my investigation and do not uphold the complaint as there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings