Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide their daughter with free transport to school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complain about the decision not to provide their daughter 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 Mr and Mrs X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information they provided. I looked at documents from the Council and gave Mr and Mrs X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on their complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr and Mrs X asked the Council to provide their daughter (Y) with free transport to the secondary school she would be attending from September 2020 (School A). This is the catchment school for Mr and Mrs X’s home address. Y has an older sibling who already attends the school and receives free transport. The Council refused Mr and Mrs X’s application because Y would not be attending the closest school to her home. It explained that from 2019, it only provided transport to new applicants to the nearest secondary school to home – subject to the distance from home to school being over three miles. The Council explained there was another school closer to Mr and Mrs X’s home (School B). Y did not therefore qualify for free transport to School A.
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. Mr and Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision and provided information in support of their appeal. Mr and Mrs X said their appeal had been delayed because of an injury Mrs X had suffered. Mr and Mrs X explained their eldest child already receives free transport to School A. They said there would be logistical issues with children at different schools. Mr and Mrs X explained they had work commitments and other parents in a similar situation had successfully appealed.
8. The second stage of the Council’s appeals process involves either an officer panel, or a panel of elected members – known as the Education Transport Appeals Committee (ETAC). The officer panel consider appeals when a parent does not want to make verbal representations; elected members consider appeals when a parent wants to present their case.
9. A panel of officers originally considered Mr and Mrs X’s appeal. The Council says this was because Mr and Mrs X did not indicate they wanted to present their case. The panel considered Mr and Mrs X’s appeal but decided not to uphold it. The panel’s decision letter explained:
• School A is not the closest school to Mr and Mrs X’s home and so there was no automatic entitlement to transport assistance.
• Y’s elder sibling receives free transport to School A under the Council’s previous transport policy. This provided free transport to the catchment school, even if it was not the closest school to home.
• The Council had consulted widely on the proposed change in policy and parents were required to indicate they understood the change in policy when they applied for a school place.
• It was a parents’ duty to ensure their child attended school – regardless of their work commitments.
• The Council could not comment on appeals submitted by other families.
• There were no exceptional reasons to grant transport.
10. Mr and Mrs X contacted the Council because they were unhappy they had not been given the chance to present their case. The Council decided that ETAC would therefore consider their appeal. Mr and Mrs X had the opportunity to present their case. Mr and Mrs X’s councillor supported their appeal.
11. Mr and Mrs X’s appeal included:
• School A is Y’s catchment school and a Church of England school.
• Y’s older sibling already attends School A and receives free transport.
• Even if Mr and Mrs X had applied for a place at School B, there was no guarantee the school would have offered Y a place.
• Mr and Mrs X had another child at primary school and there would be logistical issues if Y could not attend school with her elder sibling.
12. Mr and Mrs X’s councillor said that because there would be no extra costs to transport Y to School A, the appeal should be allowed. They also referred to the impact of COVID-19 on children, like Y, who had been forced to spend time out of school.
13. The ETAC panel considered the Council’s transport policy and information from Mr and Mrs X and their councillor. The panel decided the Council had properly applied its transport policy. They noted that an online tool available on the Council’s website showed that School B was closer than School A. There was therefore no automatic entitlement to free transport. If Mr and Mrs X had listed School B as a preference when they applied for a school, then Y would have been offered a place. The panel considered the points Mr and Mrs X put forward. The panel decided there were no exceptional circumstances meaning transport should be granted to School A.
14. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body and we cannot criticise a properly made decision or intervene to substitute an alternative view. As I explain in paragraph 3, we can only criticise a council’s decision if there was fault in the way it was reached.
15. Mr and Mrs X say other parents have successfully appealed. But this does not mean their own appeal was flawed. Appeal panels are entitled to make their own judgements on the information before them. They need to look at each case on its merits.
16. The Council has applied its transport policy and there is no indication of fault in the way it did so. The ETAC panel reached a decision it was entitled to, taking into account the information it was presented with. It explained its decision to Mr and Mrs X. I understand Mr and Mrs X are unhappy with the panel’s decision. But 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

17. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr and Mr 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