Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council has considered her application and appeal for transport to school for her son. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and so we cannot question the merits of its decisions.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the decision not to provide her son with free 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 Mrs X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information she provided. I looked at documents from the Council and gave Mrs X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mrs X’s son, Y, has a diagnosis of autism and an Education, Health and Care Plan. Y attends a school for children with Special Educational Needs.
6. Mrs X asked the Council to provide her son with free transport to school. The Council refused Mrs X’s application because the distance from home to school was less than the two miles required to automatically qualify for free transport. The Council also said there was no reason Y could not walk to school accompanied by a parent.
7. Councils must apply their transport policy when deciding entitlement to transport assistance. But they also have the discretion to consider exceptional circumstances. They must have a review or appeal process by which to do so.
8. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision and provided information in support of her appeal. Mrs X explained she was pregnant and had another child she had to take nursery. Mrs X said that because of Y’s autism, it was difficult for her to take him to school in safety. Mrs X had therefore been paying for a taxi to take Y to school. Mrs X provided a letter from Y’s school in support her appeal. An independent panel considered Mrs X’s case at the second stage of the appeals process. Mrs X attended the appeal.
9. The panel considered the Council’s transport policy and information from Mrs X. The panel decided the Council had properly applied its transport policy. It decided there was no automatic entitlement to transport assistance, and there were no exceptional circumstances meaning transport should be granted.
10. 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. The panel reached a decision it was entitled to, taking into account the information it was presented with. 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

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and so we cannot question the merits of its decisions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman