Summary: Mr B complains the Council did not properly deal with his transport to school application. The Council was not at fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr B, complains the Council did not deal with an application for transport to school for his daughter properly because:
• It did not fairly consider his grounds for appeal;
• He was not able to speak at the appeal;
• The appeal panel did not have documents that Mr B had provided; and
• A member of the appeal panel made racist comments.

Mr B says he cannot afford to pay for bus fares for his daughter to go to school.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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

3. I spoke to Mr B and considered the details of his complaint. I reviewed documents sent by the Council about Mr B’s appeal as well as information provided by Mr B.
4. Mr B 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

Law, Statutory Guidance and case law

Eligibility for free school transport

5. The Education Act 1996 says councils must provide free school transport to eligible children. The term ‘eligible’ means children of compulsory school age who meet certain criteria.
6. The eligibility criteria relevant to this complaint are that:
• The child (aged at least 8 years old) must live at least 3 miles away from school using the shortest route along which a child, accompanied if necessary, may walk safely or,
• The child cannot reasonably be expected to walk the route to school because the nature of the route is unsafe to walk.

The Council’s transport policy

7. The Council’s policy for secondary age children is to provide travel help where there is no available walking route of three miles or less.
8. The Council may provide transport assistance where there is no available walking route of two miles or less under certain circumstances, if pupils are entitled to free school meals or their parents are in receipt of maximum Working Tax Credit.
9. The Council may consider, at its discretion, providing transport assistance in certain exceptional circumstances. This includes difficult family circumstances and poverty.
10. The Council will not consider certain issues when deciding whether to provide transport assistance. Family circumstances such at parents’ employment responsibilities or other commitments are not considered when determining eligibility for assistance. The inability of a parent to accompany a child on the journey due to work or personal and family commitments will not be a factor.

What happened

11. Mr B applied for travel assistance to school for his daughter. The Council refused his application. Mr B did not appeal against the decision because he said he had not been told about the time limit to do so. The Council agreed to let him make another application.
12. Mr B made a second application for travel assistance to school for his daughter in September 2019. The Council accepted Mr B was classed as low income and declined his second application because Mr B’s daughter’s school was under two miles away.
13. Mr B asked to appeal the decision based on the grounds he had already provided. Shortly afterwards he sent the Council proof of his benefit entitlement.
14. The Council considered Mr B’s appeal at stage one. It considered the needs of Mr B’s daughter, that financial implications were not applicable, that Mr B was appealing under exceptional circumstances around himself and his wife. The Council noted that all details were the same and refused his stage one appeal on the basis Mr B’s daughter’s school is under two miles away.
15. Mr B asked to escalate his appeal to stage two and sent the Council additional documents he wanted to provide. The Council considered Mr B’s stage two appeal. Mr B attended the appeal committee meeting. The Council declined Mr B’s stage two appeal because his daughter’s school was under two miles away and it was not considered an unreasonable distance to walk unaccompanied.

Analysis

16. The clerk’s notes show that Mr B addressed the appeal committee. This is not fault by the Council.
17. The Council has provided a copy of all documents available to the appeal committee when deciding Mr B’s appeal. This documentation contains the information that Mr B provided with his applications as well as additional supporting documents he provided on two occasions. The appeal committee had all the necessary documents provided by Mr B. This is not fault by the Council.
18. I have read the clerk’s notes from the appeal hearing and I can see no evidence there that any racist comments were made. There is no recording of the appeal hearing itself. There is insufficient evidence for me to arrive at a decision about what may or may not have been said during the appeal concerning this part of Mr B’s complaint and I have not investigated this further.
19. It is clear from the evidence that Mr B provided and his complaint to the Ombudsman that financial considerations were a significant part of his complaint.
20. When Mr B appealed his supporting information centred around his own disabilities and his wife’s caring responsibilities. He did not include information about why he thought his daughter could not walk to school until he provided the second set of additional supporting information. This information was available to the appeal committee.
21. The clerk’s notes show the Council considered his disabilities, his wife’s role as a carer and Mr B’s daughter’s circumstances before deciding not to uphold the stage two appeal. This is not fault by the Council.

Final decision

22. I have not found fault by the Council when it dealt with a transport to school application. I have now completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman