Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss 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. Miss 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 Miss X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information she provided. I looked at documents from the Council and gave Miss X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. Miss X asked the Council to provide her son (Y) with free transport to the secondary school he would be attending from September 2020. The Council refused Miss X’s application because Y would not be attending his catchment school, or the closest school to home.
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. Miss X appealed the Council’s decision and provided information in support of her appeal. Miss X explained that Y would qualify for free transport to the closest or catchment school because they were both over three miles from her home. Miss X said it would not cost the Council any more money to provide transport to her preferred school. Miss X explained she had sent Y to a particular primary school because it best met his needs. Miss X felt the secondary school she had chosen was also the best school for Y.
8. A senior officer refused Miss X’s appeal at the first stage of the process. They decided the Council’s policy had been properly applied. The officer explained Y would need to catch two buses to attend Miss X’s preferred school, instead of one. The officer decided there were no reasons to make an exception to the Council’s home to school transport policy.
9. Miss X asked the Council to consider her application at stage two of its appeals process. The basis of her appeal was the same as at stage one. Miss X could not attend the appeal at the original time suggested as it was during the school day. The Council provided an alternative time, but this was also not suitable – for the same reasons.
10. An independent panel therefore considered Miss X’s case based on her written appeal and information from the Council.
11. The panel considered the Council’s transport policy and information from Miss X. The panel decided the Council had properly applied its transport policy. Because Y would not be attending the nearest qualifying school to home, or his catchment school, there was no automatic entitlement to transport assistance. The panel decided there were no exceptional circumstances meaning transport should be granted.
12. The statutory guidance on home to school transport says that parents should be given an opportunity to present their case at stage 2 of the transport appeals process. The Council met this duty by offering Miss X the chance to attend her appeal.
13. The Ombudsman cannot criticise a decision which was 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. The panel explained its decision to Miss X. Based on the information available, it is unlikely an investigation would find fault with the way the Council has acted.

Back to top

Final decision

14. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss 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