Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council considered her application and appeal for transport to school for her daughter. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it made its decision and so we cannot question the merits of its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mrs X, says that the Council did not consider her case and evidence properly, in making its decision not to provide her daughter with free transport to school.

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. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered Mrs X complaint to the Ombudsman and the information she provided. I have also considered Mrs X’s comments on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. The Council’s School Travel Policy and the Council’s school admission guides explains when a child is entitled to funded school transport. This includes children who live more than the statutory walking distance from their nearest suitable school.
6. 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.
7. The Council’s transport policy explains how it considers appeals. It says appellants will be asked to supply supporting evidence once the appeal form has been assessed. It also says the appellant is responsible for providing all relevant evidence to support their appeal.

What happened

8. Mrs X applied for her daughter (Y) to start secondary school in September 2020 at School Z. The Council offered Y a place at School Z and Mrs X asked the Council to provide Y with free transport to school. The Council considered its School Travel Policy and its published school admission guidance. It refused Mrs X’s application because Y would not be attending the nearest suitable school to her home.
9. Mrs X asked the Council to review its decision and provided evidence to support her appeal. But the Council did not change its decision. It told Mrs it will only provide free transport to the nearest suitable school that has a place available. It confirmed the nearest suitable school to Mrs X’s home is School A.
10. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision to the Officer Panel. She explained Y has asthma and suffers from travel sickness. She said the school transport would have less impact on her conditions compared to the transport to School A. She also questioned why other children near her home were offered free school transport to School Z. Mrs X said the Council’s policy does not make provision for the school that is best suited to meet Y’s needs and the Council was therefore failing in its duty of care to ensure Y’s emotional wellbeing.
11. The Council emailed Mrs X and told her when her appeal would be considered by the Officer Panel. It also invited Mrs X to provide evidence in support of her appeal. Mrs X did not supply any further evidence.
12. The Officer Panel considered the Council’s School Transport Policy and evidence from Mrs X. It decided the Council had properly applied its policy and Y had no automatic entitlement to free school transport. It confirmed that had Mrs X made an application to School A, there would have been a place for Y. The Officer Panel also decided not to exercise its discretion to provide transport on an exceptional basis. It explained it had considered Mrs X’s evidence about Y’s health and wellbeing, but it had not received any medical evidence to support the claim.
13. Mrs X is unhappy with the decision. She says she explained Y’s wellbeing issues, but the Council did not ask her for evidence in support of her appeal, contrary to its policy. She says her appeal was therefore not handled fairly and impartially.

Assessment

14. The LGSCO is a 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.
15. Mrs X said the Council did not ask her to provide more evidence in support of her appeal contrary to its policy. However, the information we have seen shows the Council invited Mrs X to provide any additional evidence she wanted it to consider. As Mrs X did not provide further evidence, the Officer Panel reached a decision it was entitled to, taking into account the evidence before it. As there is no evidence of fault in the way the Officer Panel reached its decision, we cannot question its merits.

Back to top

Final decision

I will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has considered Mrs X’s application and appeal for free transport to school for her daughter. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it made its decisions and so we cannot question the merits of them.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman