Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to put in place suitable home to school transport for his child, F, between January 2019 and March 2020. I discontinued this investigation. This was because F has alternative home to school transport arrangement in place and the Council offered Mr X a package to compensate him for taking F to and from school during that period. Further investigation by me would unlikely achieve anything further for Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to provide his child, F, with appropriate home to school transport between January 2019 and March 2020. Mr X said because of this he had to take F to and from school and the Council has failed to appropriately compensate him.

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 provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions a council has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I spoke to Mr X about his complaint.
4. I considered information from the Council.
5. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered comments before I made a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Home to school transport

6. Under the Education Act 1996 councils have a duty to provide free home to school transport for pupils of compulsory school age (5 to 16) in certain circumstances.
7. Councils must make ‘suitable travel arrangements’, ‘as they consider necessary’, for ‘eligible children’ to attend their ‘qualifying school’. This transport must be provided free of charge.
8. The relevant ‘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.’
9. Eligible children include:
• children living outside ‘statutory walking distance’ from the school (two miles for children under eight, three miles for children between eight and 16); and
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot reasonably be expected to walk to school because of their special educational needs (SEN), disability or mobility problem. For children with SEN, eligibility should be assessed on an individual basis to identify their particular transport requirements. If a school is named unconditionally in a child’s education, health and care plan (EHC plan) then it is the child’s nearest suitable school.
10. The Council’s home to school transport policy says in certain circumstances it may pay a mileage allowance to parents or carers who wish to transport their child to school.
11. The policy sets out the Council’s two stage appeals procedure for those wishing to challenge a decision, including decisions about the transport arrangements offered.

What happened

12. Mr X has a child, F, who has special educational needs (SEN) and attends school 17 miles from home. The Council agreed to provide F with home to school transport. F was transported on a bus with other children with SEN. Along with the bus driver there was also an escort.
13. Mr X contacted the Council shortly after F’s transport arrangement commenced. Mr X said the arrangement was not suitable due to F’s anxiety issues. Mr X asked the Council to review the arrangement. Mr X began taking F to and from school himself with help from other family members.
14. In April 2019 Mr X complained to the Council as it had not responded to his request to review F’s transport. The Council responded in June 2019 and said its view was the transport arrangement in place for F was suitable. The Council offered Mr X £78 a week towards his mileage costs in taking F to and from school. Mr X declined the offer as this did not cover the full cost. Mr X said he wanted £130 a week to cover his costs and time and trouble. The Council said its offer was a fuel contribution and was in line with what it offers other parents. The Council said it would backdate the payment to Easter 2019 if Mr X accepted.
15. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s response. He said the Council was only offering mileage costs for one journey each way. Mr X wanted mileage costs each way for both the drop off and pick up journeys. The Council agreed to meet with Mr X to discuss his complaint.
16. Mr X met with the Council in October 2019. Mr X explained why he thought the arrangements in place were unsuitable for F. Mr X felt the only option was for him to transport F to and from school. Following the meeting the Council wrote to Mr X and gave him two options to resolve matters. Either accept its original offer of £78 per week backdated to Easter 2019 or accept a new offer of £93 per week which would commence in September 2019.
17. Mr X wrote to the Council again and said it gave him the impression that he would receive both the original offer and the improved offer. He said the Council did not make it clear it was an either/or offer. Mr X told the Council his desired outcome was to receive the original offer of £78 backdated to Easter 2019 and then the the improved offer of £93 from September 2019 onwards.
18. In November 2019 the Council told Mr X it would meet his desired outcome. It said it would review the arrangement in the summer each year.
19. Mr X remained unhappy and asked the Council to deal with his complaint at stage 2. Mr X said he wanted the full cost of the travel paid for all legs of the journey and he wanted it backdated to January 2019 rather than Easter 2019. The Council wrote back to Mr X and said it would not escalate the complaint to stage 2. It said it had met Mr X’s desired outcome and therefore it considered the matter resolved.
20. Mr X remained unhappy and complained to the Ombudsman. Mr X reiterated the transport arrangement was not suitable and wanted the Council to compensate him for the full mileage.
21. In July 2020 Mr X told us the home to school transport arrangement is no longer in place. He said when F returns to school in September 2020, he will use a different service to transport him to and from school.

My findings

22. The Ombudsman cannot say whether the transport arrangement in place between January 2019 and March 2020 was suitable or not. This would be for an independent appeal panel to decide. As we cannot say whether the transport arrangement in place was unsuitable, we cannot recommend that the Council pay Mr X compensation for the costs he incurred taking F to and from school.
23. The Council’s view was that the arrangement was suitable, but it used its discretion and made Mr X an offer of mileage which Mr X refused. However, since complaining to us the Council has agreed to honour its original offer of paying Mr X compensation of £78 per week between Easter 2019 and September 2019 and then £93 from September 2019 until March 2020. Mr X has said he is willing to now accept this offer.
24. Mr X has confirmed F will no longer use the arrangement in place when F returns to school in September 2020 and now has a different arrangement in place.
25. Mr X has confirmed F now has alternative home to school transport in place and is now willing to accept the Council’s offer of compensation. Therefore, I have discontinued this investigation because further investigation would be unlikely to achieve anything further for Mr X.
26. It is open to Mr X to bring his complaint back to the Ombudsman if the Council fails to honour its offer of compensation to Mr X as it agreed in November 2019.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I discontinued this investigation because further investigation would unlikely achieve anything further for Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman