Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide his daughter with free or assisted transport to school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council has reached its decision and so we cannot question its merits.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision not to provide his daughter with free or assisted transport to school.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information he provided. I also gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on his complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X’s daughter (Y) attends primary school. The school Y attends was the catchment school for Mr X’s previous address. Mr X has recently moved and asked the Council to provide Y with free transport to school. The Council refused Mr X’s application. It explained free transport was provided to the catchment school or another school if closer to home. It said the school Y attends is not the catchment school for Mr X’s new address. The Council said there were other schools closer to Mr X’s home address with spaces. This meant Y did not qualify for free transport. It has told Mr X that he cannot purchase a school transport pass because of limited availability. The Council has explained it will not amend transport services for non-entitled travellers.
6. Councils must apply their transport policy when deciding entitlement to transport assistance. But they also have the discretion to consider exceptional circumstances, and they must have a review or appeal process by which to do so. Mr X appealed against the Council’s decision and provided information in support of his appeal.
7. A senior officer refused Mr X’s appeal at the first stage of the Council’s appeals process. They decided his application had been properly assessed and the extra information he had provided did not warrant an exception to the Council’s transport policy.
8. An independent appeal panel considered Mr X’s appeal at the second stage of the process. Mr X attended the appeal. The Panel considered information from the Council’s transport policy and information from Mr X. The Panel decided the Council had properly applied its policy. It decided there was no automatic entitlement to transport assistance and there were no exceptional circumstances meaning transport assistance should be granted.
9. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body and we cannot criticise a decision which is properly made, or intervene to substitute an alternative view. The Council has applied its transport policy and there is no indication of fault in the way it did so. Appeal panels are entitled to make their own judgements on the information before them. Based on the evidence available, it is unlikely an investigation would find fault with the way the Council has acted.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because it is unlikely an investigation would find fault with the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman