Summary: Mrs C complains about the Councils decision to refuse her request for home to school transport for her son. The Council were at fault because it did not consider all the points Mrs C raised in her appeal. It has agreed to arrange a new panel to consider her appeal.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs C, complains the Council refused her request for home to school transport for her son, whom I shall refer to as B. Mrs C feels the appeals panel failed to consider the points she presented in her case properly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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

4. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and information received from Mrs C; and
• reviewed and considered information received from the Council; and
• considered the relevant legislation and Council policy; and
• spoke with Mrs C about her complaint.
5. I also sent a draft version of this to both parties and invited their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and policy

Home to school transport

6. Councils have a duty to provide free home to school transport for eligible children to qualifying schools. (Education Act 1996, section 508B)
7. Eligible children are children of compulsory school age who:
• cannot walk to school because of their special educational needs, disability or a mobility problem; or
• live beyond the statutory walking distance; or
• receive free school meals, or whose parents receive the maximum Working Tax Credit. (Education Act 1996, Schedule 35B)
8. The statutory walking distance is two miles for a child aged under eight and three miles for a child aged eight and over. It is measured by the shortest route along which a child, accompanied as necessary, may walk with reasonable safety. (Education Act 1996, section 444(5))
9. The nearest qualifying school is the nearest school with places available that provides education appropriate to the age, ability and aptitude of the child, and any special educational needs the child may have.

The Council’s school transport policy

10. The Council provides school transport for children who attend the catchment area school designated by the Council for transport eligibility purposes or the nearest qualifying school and live more than three miles from the school by the shortest available walking route.
11. In 2018, the Council undertook a public consultation on changes to its school transport policy. The proposed changes would have meant B would be eligible for transport to the school Mrs C chose. However, the changes were not adopted.
12. The proposed changes to the policy were advertised online and consultation closed in September 2018. The deadline for school applications was October 2018. The decision not to proceed with the proposed changes was made in December 2018.

What happened

13. The Council refused Mrs C’s application for school transport because B does not attend the designated catchment school (for transport) or the nearest suitable school.
14. The Council has a two-stage appeal process. Stage 1 is a review by two Council officers. Stage 2 is an appeal heard by a panel of three independent volunteers. Parents are invited to attend the appeal to present their case.
15. In her written case to the appeal panel, Mrs C said that she considered B’s school choices and made her decision based on the proposed changes to the Councils school transport policy. Mrs C said that she made this decision because there was no suggestion that the proposed changes would not be implemented.
16. Mrs C said that she found that the information provided on the Council website, regarding the consultation policy was misleading.
17. Mrs C also said that she chose to send B to the school because it was pyramid school which was part of the same trust as his junior school. Mrs C says other parents from her parish have made the same choice, but because they live in a different part of the parish, and therefore the school is the closest, they have been provided free transport. Mrs C says that she is being financially disadvantaged compared to other parents in her parish.

Analysis

18. The Ombudsman is not another form of appeal and does not decide whether the Council should provide transport for children or not. My role is to check the appeal was administered without fault. If the appeal panel made its decision without fault, I cannot question their decision.
19. I have examining the appeal papers and the notes taken by the Clerk during the hearing. They show that the panel discussed and considered Mrs C’s case, and came to a unanimous decision not to uphold Mrs C appeal.
20. Although the panel concluded that there had not been any major changes to its policy, the clerk’s notes did not explain how the panel discussed and considered Mrs C’s point that information on the Council’s website about the consultation policy, was misleading.
21. It is for this reason, I am not satisfied the panel property considered Mrs C’s appeal, and I conclude that there was fault in how it came to its decision. I therefore consider that Mrs C should have the opportunity to have her case considered again.
22. Upon contacting the Ombudsman, Mrs C said that the Council had been inconsistent because she knows another parent in similar circumstances who was awarded transport by the panel. However, each appeal is considered on its own merits and in private, so it is not possible to compare appeals.

Back to top

Agreed action

23. The Council has agreed that within one month of my decision it will arrange a new appeal panel to consider Mrs C’s transport assistance appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I have completed my investigation on the basis that there was fault in how the panel considered Mrs C’s appeal. The Council have agreed to remedy this fault by arranging a new appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman