Birmingham City Council (25 003 068)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 17-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about charges for post-16 school transport. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Leeds City Council (25 002 975)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 15-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the decision to refuse the complainant’s appeal against the type of home to school transport awarded for her son. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

Hertfordshire County Council (24 020 208)

Statement Not upheld School transport 14-Aug-2025

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has failed to adhere to the statutory guidance when providing home to school transport for her son. She says her son’s journey time to and from school regularly exceeds 75 minutes. We do not find fault with the Council’s decision making.

Peterborough City Council (25 003 403)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 14-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to properly assess Mrs X’s application to renew her child’s blue badge. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council (24 016 243)

Statement Upheld School transport 11-Aug-2025

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council refused to provide her child with school transport. She said the Council did not consider her child’s special educational needs and behavioural issues which mean it is dangerous and impossible for them to walk to school, even when accompanied. Mrs X said this caused unnecessary and avoidable distress, worry and frustration. We find the Council at fault and this caused injustice. The Council has agreed to make a fresh decision.

Norfolk County Council (24 010 971)

Statement Not upheld School transport 11-Aug-2025

Summary: Ms X and Mr D complained about the Council’s failure to provide their son, who has special educational needs, with school transport from both his parents’ separate addresses. We did not find the Council to be at fault because it applied its policy when it used its discretion not have to provide transport from Mr D's address because it was in another council’s area.

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (24 014 709)

Statement Upheld School transport 07-Aug-2025

Summary: Mr F complained the Council refused to provide home to school transport for his son (J) who has special educational needs. As a result, he has had to transport J causing a strain on his finances. Mr F also complained the Council failed to follow its appeals process and properly consider his evidence which caused him frustration. We found fault which caused uncertainty. The Council has agreed to hold a new appeal panel.

Bracknell Forest Council (24 016 166)

Statement Upheld School transport 07-Aug-2025

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to follow government guidance when deciding the route Y’s school transport should take. We find the Council at fault for failing to evidence its decision-making process and for providing incorrect information, creating uncertainty for Mr X. The Council should apologise, make a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice, and act to prevent recurrence.

Hertfordshire County Council (25 002 371)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 07-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to advise the complainant of proposed changes to her child’s school transport arrangements. We consider further investigation will not lead to a worthwhile outcome and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

London Borough of Wandsworth (24 016 572)

Statement Upheld School transport 30-Jul-2025

Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly decided it would not provide support with post-16 school transport costs for his child D, who is disabled and has an Education, Health, and Care Plan. There was fault by the Council which caused avoidable distress and confusion for Mr X and meant it did not properly consider his appeal about this issue. The Council agreed to reconsider Mr X’s appeal, apologise, and pay a financial remedy. It will also ensure its published policy accurately describes its appeal process, review its record keeping procedures for appeals, and provide training to staff about the faults we identified.